...WHO rates the US health care system as a whole as being only 37th, which isn't all that good an outcome for spending the most money.
We need to go behind those numbers though and have a look at how they are calculated. It's not all that unusual for international statistics of these kinds to contain some, well, how to put this, odd assumptions. The answers to that are here. This is what the WHO uses to calculate those numbers and the weightings they put upon them.
1. Health Level: 25%
2. Health Distribution: 25%
3. Responsiveness: 12.5%
4. Responsiveness Distribution: 12.5%
5. Financial Fairness: 25%
As you can see, there's a great deal of assuming going on there about what makes a decent health care system. In fact, only 37.5% of the weighting is actually about health care itself: the other 62.5% is about distribution and fairness, how equal or unequal it all is.
These may be fair things to worry about, of course, but it does seem a little odd to assume that we must judge health care by equity. Judging it more (rather than only very much in part) by how good the actual health care is might seem more sensible.
What happens if we take a step further and look at the numbers for each of those five measurements that make up the total system ranking?
In terms of the health level, the US is 24th, distribution 32 nd, responsiveness 1st, responsiveness distribution joint 3-38th and financial fairness, joint 54- 55th.
I take it from that that what the (yes, hugely expensive) US health care system actually offers is responsiveness. That when we desire to be looked at, we get looked at. When we need or desire treatment then we get it faster than any place else on the planet. That's simply an extremely expensive thing to provide...
examiner.com
I don't have a high opinion of the WHO study. Most of that is about what criteria and weighting is uses for its overall ranking, not its measurement of each area, but I don't have confidence in those either. OTOH while I don't have confidence in them, they aren't as obviously faulty, and I think there is a real point here.
Even though there are cases where the US system isn't as responsive as people might like, overall I agree with WHO that's its likely the most responsive system, and yes we pay big bucks in order to achieve that. |
