Worst Health Care system in the world

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

This isn't exactly a relevant statistic. The proportion of overall deaths is actually relevant. Try to keep up with elementary mathematics.

[Maurepas]

It has no health care system, hence it can't be the worst health care system.

It's hard to be worse than nothing. Well, there are several places in the universe with negative health care, like pretty much everywhere that isn't Earth.

Idk, perhaps if you define it by numbers of cured vs numbers that got diseases from the hospital itself...

there could be those whose numbers in the latter outweigh the former, meaning they would be in the negative...

[Neu Leonstein]

It's hard to be worse than nothing. Well, there are several places in the universe with negative health care, like pretty much everywhere that isn't Earth.

I can imagine dying quietly in Antarctica to be nicer than dying in a Congolese hospital.

But that's beside the point, since Antarctica (given its lack of a system) doesn't belong to the set of places with health care systems, hence it can't be a minimum on a ranking of any kind of elements within that set.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Idk, perhaps if you define it by numbers of cured vs numbers that got diseases from the hospital itself...

there could be those whose numbers in the latter outweigh the former, meaning they would be in the negative...

I'm more considering the fact that the life expectancy anywhere in the non-Earth universe is less than an hour without some oxygen supply, and that's for the tame stuff, like deep space. Other parts have basically a life expectancy of a few nanoseconds.

[Discount Liquor World]

Bro, there are places like, deep within the atmosphere of Jupitar, that if you even TRIED to establish a healthcare system, the immense gravity, radiation, poison gasses and extreme heat would kill you instantly. If you found yourself sick there, you'd die within a fraction of a second.

I mean, that'd hella suck, even worst then Mongolia ot Alabama or whatever.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

I can imagine dying quietly in Antarctica to be nicer than dying in a Congolese hospital.

But that's beside the point, since Antarctica (given its lack of a system) doesn't belong to the set of places with health care systems, hence it can't be its minimum on a ranking of any kind of elements within that set.

I'm not actually convinced that it has no health care. Surely there are medical doctors stationed in those research sites? Those doctors and the extreme cold killing off most microbes has to make Antarctica have better health care than some places in the perpetually fucked continent of Africa.

[Maurepas]

Idk, perhaps if you define it by numbers of cured vs numbers that got diseases from the hospital itself...

there could be those whose numbers in the latter outweigh the former, meaning they would be in the negative...

I'm more considering the fact that the life expectancy anywhere in the non-Earth universe is less than an hour without some oxygen supply, and that's for the tame stuff, like deep space. Other parts have basically a life expectancy of a few nanoseconds.

No doubt, I was joking,

[Louis Van Boxel Woolf]

Well in my view Europe's is best but this is because i am a European and think our NHS works very well and many myths and rumours are circulating in America about how waiting times are forever, it's underfunded, we have the highest mortality rate in Europe etc. These rumours are only true for NHS Dentists! And the worst, the USA's.
Although the UK's life expentancy is 2 years higher than the U.S.A's.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Bro, there are places like, deep within the atmosphere of Jupitar, that if you even TRIED to establish a healthcare system, the immense gravity, radiation, poison gasses and extreme heat would kill you instantly. If you found yourself sick there, you'd die within a fraction of a second.

I mean, that'd hella suck, even worst then Mongolia ot Alabama or whatever.

The atmospheric composition doesn't seem that dangerous. Sure, legitimate amount of breathable oxygen, but it doesn't seem poisonous.

[North Suran]

I'm not even sure if Cuba should be counted here. The country is messed up. It's like a race between a midget, a guy with no legs, and Usain Bolt.

Overall, their healthcare system was last rated, I believe, as right below us.

I remember TV Nation once did a "Healthcare Olympics" with the USA, Canada and Cuba.

Cuba came first in terms of cost, efficiency, time-spent waiting, etc.

The show's producers forced the team to edit the results so that Canada came first instead.

[Hairless Kitten II]

Worst healthcare in the world would likely go to... Maybe Somalia, I hear they have an effective anarchy.

We are talking about countries with a worse health care system. Not the ones with NO system at all

[The Tofu Islands]

What's wrong with it is it's the wrong "option" and it's not intended to be an "option," it's intended to be the first step in forcing all private insurers out of business and everyone into the government-run so-called "option."

What evidence do you have for this assertion? In most countries with universal health care systems private health care is still permitted. From what I recall, Canada is the only countries where it is banned.

A public "option" unfairly competes against private insurers. A government-run plan has no stock holders to answer to, no profit to make and no limit to the resources it can expend.

Good. The object of health care should not be to make money, it should be to help the sick. Also, it's interesting to note that despite the "no limit on resources", the US spends far more on health care then France, Canada, and the United Kingdom (for example). All of which are socialised systems.

[The Tofu Islands]

We are talking about countries with a worse health care system. Not the ones with NO system at all

Uh... Antarctica is on the list. Last I checked it doesn't have much of a system....

[Gravlen]

I'm torn between "Other" - because I suspect the honor falls to a so-called third world country - and "Europe", since...

Since Antarctica literally has no health care (unless those small research teams do), I don't see how it couldn't be the worst on Earth.

It has no health care system, hence it can't be the worst health care system.

Indeed. On the other hand, the quality of care the scientists and military personell stationed at the base at the south pole get are supposed to be good, so it would probably not rank at the bottom regardless.

[The Tofu Islands]

As for my actual answer, it's probably some really poor country somewhere (so I voted Other). However, given that the US is a developed country and has a (relatively) good economy, it's performance is shameful.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Zimbabwe's healthcare system may have suffered quite badly during the days of hyperinflation but with a unity government this may change.

[Kryozerkia]

According to WHO, Myanmar has the worst.

According to the dipshits here its the USA, yea the USA is apparently worse than Myanmar.

You realize this poll has an ''other'' option, other means every place in the world not already listed in the world. So how am I wrong to call someone who thinks nations like Myanmar and the Sudan have better healthcare than the USA dipshits, explain it to me please. Though I never get sick of calling stupid people, out.

I do know what flaming is, however, if I have to flame to point out how stupid someone is being than so be it. You can make me, calling people who blindly hate the USA and therefor vote that the US is the worst in various areas, an issue if you want. I know you're probably one of the dipshits who voted the USA has the worst healthcare in the world, thats probably what got your panties up in a bunch.

You're wrong to do it because flaming is against the rules. It's just that simple. If you can't express your shock at someone's stance on an issue without resorting to flaming then your point probably can't stand on its own two legs. That being said, warned for flaming.

[RoI2]

Worst in the developed world - USA
Worst in the world - no idea

[Dakini]

I can imagine dying quietly in Antarctica to be nicer than dying in a Congolese hospital.

But that's beside the point, since Antarctica (given its lack of a system) doesn't belong to the set of places with health care systems, hence it can't be its minimum on a ranking of any kind of elements within that set.

I'm not actually convinced that it has no health care. Surely there are medical doctors stationed in those research sites? Those doctors and the extreme cold killing off most microbes has to make Antarctica have better health care than some places in the perpetually fucked continent of Africa.

I'm pretty sure that they have doctors there. And during the summer the medical system probably also includes airlifts to Australia.

[Dakini]

We are talking about countries with a worse health care system. Not the ones with NO system at all

Uh... Antarctica is on the list. Last I checked it doesn't have much of a system....

It was the much requested joke option.

[Dakini]

Although I'm very skeptical as to murder/auto fatalities having a substantial impact on life expectancy for the population.

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

If this is true, then why does Japan have such a high life expectancy when it has so many suicides?

[Rolling squid]

What's wrong with it is it's the wrong "option" and it's not intended to be an "option," it's intended to be the first step in forcing all private insurers out of business and everyone into the government-run so-called "option."

A public "option" unfairly competes against private insurers. A government-run plan has no stock holders to answer to, no profit to make and no limit to the resources it can expend. It can sell at a loss (made up for by simply voting more money out of the taxpayers' pockets), thereby undercutting private insurers. In international trade that would be considered "dumping". It can give tax advantages to companies to get rid of their insurance benefits programs and thereby dump its employees into the so-called "option." The "principles of the free market" don't apply to government entities, since Congress can always give them more money no matter how lousy a job they do--just look at the Post Office, Amtrak, Medicare and Fanny Mae, to name but a few examples.

The only legitimate way to increase competition is to remove obstacles to private insurers competing and private individuals buying what they determine meets their needs. That includes allowing interstate sales of insurance policies, giving private individuals tax credits for insurance costs so they can buy insurance with pre-tax dollars like employers do, and allowing medical expense savings accounts. And more importantly than anything else, TORT REFORM is needed to reduce the need for defensive medicine and its resultant unnecessary tests, procedures and expenditures.

Only free enterprise will improve health care and health insurance. Government interference, and its ultimate goal of government control, will only result in poorer quality, longer lines and more dead senior citizens.

Question: Why should health care be done for profit? It would seem that helping people and saving lives should be done by people who's first concern is making sure their charge gets better, not that their charge spends money. The fact is, without health care, people die. That fact alone should make it accessible to anyone, regardless of the size of their pocket book. The troubling fact in America is that many people are left to die because a private insurance company exploits a loophole to deny them care that they cannot afford without insurance. A hospital, who's first concern is making a profit, will not treat someone in that condition, because they cannot turn a profit. If said person ends up in the emergency room to receive treatment they cannot afford, guess who ends up paying for them? You and I, as the hospital jacks it rates to cover those who cannot pay. If the insurance company hadn't denied out patient care, he would have lived, and our bills would be lower. Everybody wins.

When considering health care, it also makes sense to study the rest of the world. Look at France, for example. They have a very effective system that manages to combine both public and private insurance. The main way they do this is through paying for medical school, which allows them to control the number of GP's to specialists, a ratio that is sorely skewed to the specialist side in America. This means that your average American actually waits longer for annual checkups. These checkups are the most effective form of health care a system can provide, because they allow potential problems to be spotted and corrected long before they become life threating and expensive to treat. At the very least, everyone should be given basic access to their doctor for a checkup once a year if they want to have one. The same should be true for dentists.

[RoI2]

Poll fail. How can Europe have bad health care? It's not a single health care system. Antarctica - wtf?

[Pope Joan]

People still try to sneak into Cuba to find good surgeons! No it is true.

I say Laos is worst. "The life expectancy at birth for men and women in Laos was estimated in 1988 at forty-nine years, the same as in Cambodia but at least ten years lower than in any other Southeast Asian nation"

http://countrystudies.us/laos/62.htm

Look at their teeth!

That is a sure clue to rotten health care.

By that standard, the UK comes in second place.

[Classical Liberal]

I would say on a logical and practical note, third world nations have the worst health care in the world, however, as far as developed world, I would say Europe no doubt, but on some more notes, I think those penguins are a little too unhealthy, I mean, everyone in Antarctica dies before most humans, it's horrid I tell you, horrid!