If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   A world map of average life expectancy by country   (io9.com) divider line 69
    More: Interesting, life expectancy, CIA World Factbook, Don't Bother  
•       •       •

9206 clicks; posted to Geek » on 28 Nov 2012 at 8:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-28 08:36:27 PM
Obongos Amurka! Fruck yeah!
 
2012-11-28 08:42:53 PM
Look how long those commies live. Must be preserved by all that evil. It's like formaldehyde.
 
2012-11-28 08:45:44 PM
The countries that beat the US are important.

But, the countries that aren't far behind are pretty important too. Mexico, Albania, Libya, Poland, Argentina, etc.

These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

The model average American works ~7-8 years of his career just to pay for health expenses (when Medicare, etc, are in the picture).

We could have Mexican-level care working for 2. The Mexican life expectancy is 2 years shorter than ours. 8-2-2... seems like a 4-year net gain in retirement to me. Oh, and these are prime years (the extended lifespan of Americans generally translates to dotage years). The marginal benefits are small and shrinking.
 
2012-11-28 08:52:09 PM

Lawnchair: We could have Mexican-level care working for 2.


Or French-level care working for 3 or 4 if we had normal 1st world health care funding.
 
2012-11-28 08:52:25 PM
We white folks seem to have the market cornered.
 
2012-11-28 08:57:07 PM

Lawnchair: The countries that beat the US are important.

But, the countries that aren't far behind are pretty important too. Mexico, Albania, Libya, Poland, Argentina, etc.

These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

The model average American works ~7-8 years of his career just to pay for health expenses (when Medicare, etc, are in the picture).

We could have Mexican-level care working for 2. The Mexican life expectancy is 2 years shorter than ours. 8-2-2... seems like a 4-year net gain in retirement to me. Oh, and these are prime years (the extended lifespan of Americans generally translates to dotage years). The marginal benefits are small and shrinking.


All of that is probably true for deaths due to natural causes, but I'd wager that accidental injuries in those countries are more often fatal than they would be in the usa or other countries with similar spending levels. Having my life be potentially saved at 33 years old seems to me to be a pretty large benefit of an advanced health care system.
 
2012-11-28 09:00:25 PM

The Man Who Laughs: the usa or other countries with similar spending levels


There are no other countries with similar spending levels to the US.

We pay TWICE as much per capita as normal countries.
 
2012-11-28 09:03:32 PM
I don't know about you guys, but I couldn't live on the isle of man for 80 years. I have needs.
 
2012-11-28 09:03:36 PM
screw the golden years, I want my obit to read "He was as sharp as a tack at 85 before going on that coke and heroin binge leading up to the shooting rampage at Radio City Music Hall"
 
2012-11-28 09:06:35 PM
Quite a few of those shouldn't even be considered countries. I think they were put on that list just to keep the US out of the top 25.

/Geography nerd
 
2012-11-28 09:08:27 PM

Lawnchair: The countries that beat the US are important.

But, the countries that aren't far behind are pretty important too. Mexico, Albania, Libya, Poland, Argentina, etc.

These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

The model average American works ~7-8 years of his career just to pay for health expenses (when Medicare, etc, are in the picture).

We could have Mexican-level care working for 2. The Mexican life expectancy is 2 years shorter than ours. 8-2-2... seems like a 4-year net gain in retirement to me. Oh, and these are prime years (the extended lifespan of Americans generally translates to dotage years). The marginal benefits are small and shrinking.


But their doctors have to live like plebs.

Also zomg torts!
 
2012-11-28 09:08:56 PM

jaytkay: The Man Who Laughs: the usa or other countries with similar spending levels

There are no other countries with similar spending levels to the US.

We pay TWICE as much per capita as normal countries.


Well maybe I should have said similar medical standards. I don't know much at all about american spending, but I can tell you for sure I'd rather be treated by an american hospital than a Mexican one.
 
2012-11-28 09:09:18 PM
Thats unpossible, we spend more per person than any other nation on earth and get to die earlier for it.

Damn you obama for interfering with such a perfect system!
 
2012-11-28 09:12:18 PM

Kanemano: screw the golden years, I want my obit to read "He was as sharp as a tack at 85 before going on that coke and heroin binge leading up to the shooting rampage at Radio City Music Hall"


I plan to have a thirty foot tall statue of me crushing people underfoot. When people see it, I want them to think, "Thank God that guy's dead. We'd be in deep s**t if he was still around!"
 
2012-11-28 09:16:49 PM

hogans: Kanemano: screw the golden years, I want my obit to read "He was as sharp as a tack at 85 before going on that coke and heroin binge leading up to the shooting rampage at Radio City Music Hall"

I plan to have a thirty foot tall statue of me crushing people underfoot. When people see it, I want them to think, "Thank God that guy's dead. We'd be in deep s**t if he was still around!"


images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-11-28 09:19:54 PM
This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11
 
2012-11-28 09:20:59 PM

The Man Who Laughs: Well maybe I should have said similar medical standards. I don't know much at all about american spending, but I can tell you for sure I'd rather be treated by an american hospital than a Mexican one.


Don't look below the US on the list of health care quality. Look up.

US health care is worse than France, Germany, Sweden, Canada, the UK, etc.

At twice the price per capita.
 
2012-11-28 09:23:52 PM

Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11


Canada is homogenous?
 
2012-11-28 09:25:36 PM
The Man Who Laughs: These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

Americans die expensive deaths. Take someone that's going to die, no matter what medical technology tries to do for them.

In the US, they will try all sorts of stuff to save someone that's ultimately not saveable (as long as they have the cash to pay).

In another country, maybe they don't try as hard.

The end result is that in both countries, it counts as one death, but the cost of that death is way higher in the US.

// you see a similar thing with fetus deaths and the reporting of fetus deaths, the US tries to save all sorts of premature births while some other countries with lower baby mortality rates have those rates because they don't count preemies as part of their regular statistics.
 
2012-11-28 09:25:49 PM
I have a great idea! We should destroy the economy and eliminate the ability of many, many small to medium sized businesses to remain viable and competitive in an unproven and ill fated attempt to provide "high quality" health care to all!
 
2012-11-28 09:26:59 PM
 
2012-11-28 09:29:00 PM

lordargent: The Man Who Laughs: These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

Americans die expensive deaths. Take someone that's going to die, no matter what medical technology tries to do for them.

In the US, they will try all sorts of stuff to save someone that's ultimately not saveable (as long as they have the cash to pay).

In another country, maybe they don't try as hard.

The end result is that in both countries, it counts as one death, but the cost of that death is way higher in the US.

// you see a similar thing with fetus deaths and the reporting of fetus deaths, the US tries to save all sorts of premature births while some other countries with lower baby mortality rates have those rates because they don't count preemies as part of their regular statistics.


You sound like you work on one of them there death panels!

/Death panels!
 
2012-11-28 09:31:14 PM
For as fat as our nation is our health care network is doing a hell of a great farking job keeping you people alive that long. Eat smaller portions and help cut healthcare costs you pigs.
 
2012-11-28 09:37:24 PM

The Man Who Laughs: Well maybe I should have said similar medical standards. I don't know much at all about american spending, but I can tell you for sure I'd rather be treated by an american hospital than a Mexican one.


Speak for yourself. I've had outstanding care in Mexico. Near where my place is down there, they recently built a huge new hospital specifically catering to medical tourism.
 
2012-11-28 09:38:26 PM

Ishkur: Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11

Canada is homogenous?


reason.com
I didn't know this guy was from Canadia!

/Canucks are usually more polite. 
//Just walk away, eh?
 
2012-11-28 09:40:32 PM
So the idea is then: upon turning 77, move to Canada to get a few more years.
 
2012-11-28 09:42:24 PM

Giltric: For as fat as our nation is our health care network is doing a hell of a great farking job keeping you people alive that long. Eat smaller portions and help cut healthcare costs you pigs.


Essentially said what I was going to say. Where is the U.S. on obesity rates, diabetes, meth addiction and death/serious injury from gun violence? Considering some of the health obstacles we put in our own way, we probably do OK.
 
2012-11-28 09:50:39 PM
Who's on the bottom?
 
2012-11-28 09:55:37 PM

Ishkur: Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11

Canada is homogenous?


Not that there's anything wrong with that.
 
2012-11-28 09:55:43 PM

Khazar-Khum: Who's on the bottom?


By most reckonings, Mozambique. I'd figure any country with an AK-47 on its flag has probably got a few issues.
 
2012-11-28 10:11:20 PM

Kanemano: Interactive version


According to this there is a South Pacific island called Niue with a life expectancy of 0.0 years. That's pretty harsh.
 
2012-11-28 10:13:10 PM

Lawnchair: Khazar-Khum: Who's on the bottom?

By most reckonings, Mozambique. I'd figure any country with an AK-47 on its flag has probably got a few issues.


Had to check... 39.2 average, holy crap!
 
2012-11-28 10:13:56 PM

MrHappyRotter: I have a great idea! We should destroy the economy and eliminate the ability of many, many small to medium sized businesses to remain viable and competitive in an unproven and ill fated attempt to provide "high quality" health care to all!


You sound well-informed.

Tell us how decent wide-spread healthcare has destroyed Western Europe and Japan.

Be specific.

TIA!!
 
2012-11-28 10:23:43 PM

Lawnchair: The countries that beat the US are important.

But, the countries that aren't far behind are pretty important too. Mexico, Albania, Libya, Poland, Argentina, etc.

These are countries that average 1/4th or less of the US per capita spending on health care. And they live, on average, 1-2 years less than the average American.

The model average American works ~7-8 years of his career just to pay for health expenses (when Medicare, etc, are in the picture).

We could have Mexican-level care working for 2. The Mexican life expectancy is 2 years shorter than ours. 8-2-2... seems like a 4-year net gain in retirement to me. Oh, and these are prime years (the extended lifespan of Americans generally translates to dotage years). The marginal benefits are small and shrinking.


It likely has just as much to do with diet and lifestyle than just healthcare. Healthcare won't save you when your breakfast is Donuts and sugared Coffee, morning snack is a pack of skittles, lunch is from McDonalds, afternoon snack is a snickers and coke, dinner is pizza/wings/soda, and then a 3rd/4th snack of doritos/ice cream before bed.
 
2012-11-28 10:24:39 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: Thats unpossible, we spend more per person than any other nation on earth and get to die earlier for it.

Damn you obama for interfering with such a perfect system!


It's almost as though there are other factors in play, like diet, exercise, and genetics.
 
2012-11-28 10:31:12 PM

revrendjim: Kanemano: Interactive version

According to this there is a South Pacific island called Niue with a life expectancy of 0.0 years. That's pretty harsh.


all the people of NIue are New Zealand citizens so I guess NZ also owns their statistics
 
2012-11-28 10:35:02 PM

Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11


Predominantly homogeneous countries like Australia?

/'tis to laugh
//top 10!!
///ahh, racism. Is there anything it can't blame blacks for?
 
2012-11-28 10:37:10 PM

MrHappyRotter: I have a great idea! We should destroy the economy and eliminate the ability of many, many small to medium sized businesses to remain viable and competitive in an unproven and ill fated attempt to provide "high quality" health care to all!


Funny how other countries can have both a strong economy and quality health care for all.
But I understand. Americans are just not capable of figuring it out. It's the derp shield interfering with their brains.
 
2012-11-28 10:37:55 PM
Nobody mentioned socialised medicine yet.

Socialised medicine.
 
2012-11-28 10:45:42 PM

Lt_Ryan: It likely has just as much to do with diet and lifestyle than just healthcare. Healthcare won't save you when your breakfast is Donuts and sugared Coffee, morning snack is a pack of skittles, lunch is from McDonalds, afternoon snack is a snickers and coke, dinner is pizza/wings/soda, and then a 3rd/4th snack of doritos/ice cream before bed.


You been following my Ryan?
 
2012-11-28 11:06:51 PM

0Icky0: MrHappyRotter: I have a great idea! We should destroy the economy and eliminate the ability of many, many small to medium sized businesses to remain viable and competitive in an unproven and ill fated attempt to provide "high quality" health care to all!

Funny how other countries can have both a strong economy and quality health care for all.
But I understand. Americans are just not capable of figuring it out. It's the derp shield interfering with their brains.


Shiat, Iceland is broke and they have better health care.
 
2012-11-28 11:08:01 PM

Khazar-Khum: Who's on the bottom?


Darfur? (Or rather, Sudan?)
 
2012-11-28 11:09:39 PM

Bob Down: Nobody mentioned socialised medicine yet.

Socialised medicine.


The years I lived and worked in Japan and Taiwan I received GREAT soshulized medicine. Low co-pays and all.
 
2012-11-28 11:58:58 PM
Whoa -- how is Russia that bad? It's even behind Kazakhstan and Mongolia! Is it the vodak?
 
2012-11-29 12:09:51 AM

Khazar-Khum: Who's on the bottom?


According to the map, Angola, Zambia, and I think Lesotho.

I'll note, however, that the lowest category in the map is "-40." This is notable because for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty, mainly because of disease. This all changed in the twentieth century, and now only a small fraction of humanities living in a handful of countries are lacking the means to live past that age. Even if you look at the poor performance of a country like Ethiopia, it's important to remember that they can already live longer than our great-great-grandparent's generation, and that they're continuing to make progress.
 
2012-11-29 12:18:06 AM

Arkanaut: for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty


Is that correct for people who survive infancy?

Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.
 
2012-11-29 12:24:35 AM

jaytkay: Is that correct for people who survive infancy?

Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.


Ya...people always forget that important part.
One of my ancestors died in 1783 at the age of 103.
(he hung on to see the final score in the American Revolution)
 
2012-11-29 12:56:24 AM

jaytkay: Arkanaut: for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty

Is that correct for people who survive infancy?

Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.


Wikipedia has a chart.
 
2012-11-29 01:03:57 AM
AIDS is one hell of a disease. And yeah, Afghanistan has a big HIV problem thanks to heroin.
 
2012-11-29 01:29:53 AM
My sister in law just tonight posted on Facebook that she doesn't like the government telling her what to do (which in this case meant buy health insurance). Neither of her adult children have health insurance because it's too expensive and their employers don't offer it. Her grandchildren are on Medicaid. She and my brother were on welfare back when they first got married (she had a kid from a prior relationship--got knocked up at 16). Now, I fully believe in tax-funded safety nets. We have them because life is hard and shiat happens. I don't begrudge her her history of welfare (like the extreme majority of recipients, they got off it as soon as possible), and I don't begrudge her grand kids their Medicaid; it's not their fault their (divorced) parents' employers don't offer insurance. But for her to biatch about the government telling her what to do when her family has directly benefited from it, well, fark her and her hypocrisy.
 
2012-11-29 01:40:12 AM

MrEricSir: jaytkay: Arkanaut: for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty

Is that correct for people who survive infancy?

Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.

Wikipedia has a chart.


That page shows that from 1200 to 1500 CE, if you reached age 21, you were likely to reach 60 or 70.
 
2012-11-29 01:45:25 AM

Mike Chewbacca: My sister in law just tonight posted on Facebook that she doesn't like the government telling her what to do (which in this case meant buy health insurance). Neither of her adult children have health insurance because it's too expensive and their employers don't offer it. Her grandchildren are on Medicaid. She and my brother were on welfare back when they first got married (she had a kid from a prior relationship--got knocked up at 16). Now, I fully believe in tax-funded safety nets. We have them because life is hard and shiat happens. I don't begrudge her her history of welfare (like the extreme majority of recipients, they got off it as soon as possible), and I don't begrudge her grand kids their Medicaid; it's not their fault their (divorced) parents' employers don't offer insurance. But for her to biatch about the government telling her what to do when her family has directly benefited from it, well, fark her and her hypocrisy.


People who expected death panels should get death panels.

Take your sister-in-law. Please.

rimshot.jpg
 
2012-11-29 02:02:01 AM
Another difference between the U.S. and the countries ahead of them on this list: gun-related deaths.
 
2012-11-29 02:19:50 AM

Kevin72: Bob Down: Nobody mentioned socialised medicine yet.

Socialised medicine.

The years I lived and worked in Japan and Taiwan I received GREAT soshulized medicine. Low co-pays and all.


Now I know you didn't really work in Japan. I had a lot of issues with infections when I first came here, and a couple cases of bad food poisoning, so I've got some experience.... I will never go to the doctor here ever again because its just too scary. Terrifying.

It's a shame, too. My wonderful "socialized medicine" costs me 200 bucks a month, plus 30% of any medical costs. That's far more than I paid in the states (25yo non-smoker, occasional drinker, lift and play basketball regularly).
 
2012-11-29 02:30:13 AM

jaytkay: People who expected death panels should get death panels.


I love this idea.

Hold a nation-wide poll, asking people a few key questions about what they think the HCA does/will do. Don't tell anyone what it's for, or just say you're collecting opinions for some harmless reason. Better yet, say it's part of some sort of national referendum that may effect its retention/repeal, to encourage the crazies to participate.

For anyone who takes the poll, tailor their care according to their answers.

In fact, that would work great for all kinds of things. Tax hike on 4% of the population, but 28% say their taxes went up as a result of the same legislation (note: yes, that happens)? OK, your Palin-American perspective is now reality (for you)!

Don't understand marginal tax rates and think you just get taxed at your top rate, period? Good news for the rest of us: now you do!

This has the makings of a damn funny satirical skit, now that I think about it.
 
2012-11-29 04:22:05 AM
Damn... sucks to be Haiti. Made it to the big 3-0? Congrats, you're above average. :(
 
2012-11-29 04:50:14 AM
Jersey is a separate country? Are not the channel islands part of Great Britain?
 
2012-11-29 07:21:51 AM

unyon: The Man Who Laughs: Well maybe I should have said similar medical standards. I don't know much at all about american spending, but I can tell you for sure I'd rather be treated by an american hospital than a Mexican one.

Speak for yourself. I've had outstanding care in Mexico. Near where my place is down there, they recently built a huge new hospital specifically catering to medical tourism.


Medical tourism? Is that where you watch a donkey show while having your spleen removed?
 
2012-11-29 08:28:41 AM
Quality >quantity
 
2012-11-29 08:40:37 AM

Ishkur: Canada is homogenous?


Apparently the fact that immigrants outnumber Canadian-born citizens in the country's largest city isn't supposed to count.
 
2012-11-29 08:51:23 AM

jaytkay: Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.


Certainly, but most of the people who don't survive that long don't make it into the history books. I guess what I was trying to say is that the mean was lower but the standard deviation was higher?
 
2012-11-29 09:55:05 AM
I'm not certain about the Japan data for this:

More than 230,000 elderly people in Japan who are listed as being aged 100 or over are unaccounted for, officials said following a nationwide inquiry.

An audit of family registries was launched last month after the remains of the man thought to be Tokyo's oldest were found at his family home.

Relatives are accused of fraudulently receiving his pension for decades.
 
2012-11-29 10:06:05 AM

MrEricSir: jaytkay: Arkanaut: for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty

Is that correct for people who survive infancy?

Seems like history is full of people who lived into there 40s, 50 and 60s.

Wikipedia has a chart.


Woo! I always thought this and winced every time someone would say "Well yeah but you only lived till 35 in the middle ages!", but I didn't have data to back me up. Now I do!

*clinks glass* Gracias!
 
2012-11-29 10:59:38 AM

Ishkur: Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11

Canada is homogenous?


ADHD Librarian: Predominantly homogeneous countries like Australia?


Aren't you guys cute, ignoring the Northern European demographics of these countries.
 
2012-11-29 11:44:24 AM
The U.S. is down at #50 for infant mortality rates (in the same league as former Soviet Block countries), and has 23% of children living in poverty (second to last in the developed world) so it's not really surprising that the overall life expectancy average is much lower than the countries that the US would like to consider its peers.
 
2012-11-29 01:15:14 PM

Arkanaut: This is notable because for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty, mainly because of disease.


If you made it out of childhood, it wasn't that bad. The average adult could live into their 50's even in the Paleolithic, and into their 60's in the Middle Ages. Problem was, they often didn't make it through childhood.
 
2012-11-29 02:24:01 PM

Bruce Campbell: Ishkur: Bruce Campbell: This just in: predominantly homogeneous first world countries are best equipped for handling the health issues of its citizens and doing so economically. Film at 11

Canada is homogenous?

ADHD Librarian: Predominantly homogeneous countries like Australia?

Aren't you guys cute, ignoring the Northern European demographics of these countries.


Just to check we are on the same page, you are comparing us to the US with its 73% white or European population, right?
 
2012-11-29 05:52:54 PM
We know how to define death, so that isn't a problem with these numbers. One inherent problem with life expectancy numbers is different countries define life differently. This usually only comes up in discussions of infant mortaility, suc as when someone makes a ludicruous claim about Cuba's superiority to the United States, but the same problem affects these numbers as well. If a premature baby is born alive and dies, and that doesn't count as a birth, then you can't compare data to another country where that is counted as a live birth (and then a death) that will hit life expectancy statistics. It's like comparing your golf score to that of the guy who takes mulligans.
 
2012-11-29 08:17:55 PM

Ambitwistor: Arkanaut: This is notable because for most of human history, the average person in even the most advanced society could not expect to live past forty, mainly because of disease.

If you made it out of childhood, it wasn't that bad. The average adult could live into their 50's even in the Paleolithic, and into their 60's in the Middle Ages. Problem was, they often didn't make it through childhood.


I don't think they bothered reporting the "average" adult back then. They may have written down dates of birth and death for people born into the nobility, but I don't think they bothered for an awful lot of the peasants. The data might be a bit biased.
 
Displayed 69 of 69 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report