[Hopeful]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

I'm not dismissing them. I've asked over and over for them to be quantified. No one has quantified them.

So drug-use changes life expectancy? OK. How much? And are there more drug-users here or in Sweeden.

No one arguing seems to know. So without that the only information available is the actual life-expectancy.

Mind you: if we make a change in US healthcare and the US life expectancy changes; that would also be good and useful information.

So I'll ask yet again. Do you know that all of these factors work in Sweden's favor, or might they work to lower the life expectancy in Sweden (meaning their healthcare is that much better still)?

You don't know? Then you can't factor them in.

OK, I'll ask the same thing. Quantify the effect of universal health care by itself on the life expectancy in Sweden vs. the US.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by Hopeful

OK, I'll ask the same thing. Quantify the effect of universal health care by itself on the life expectancy in Sweden vs. the US.

Longer life-span. Feel free to prove otherwise.

[Hopeful]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Longer life-span. Feel free to prove otherwise.

Longer life-span has also been attributed to other factors as mentioned in the numerous articles we have provided. You simply choose to ignore what has been proven. Just read the articles if you will and be honest with yourself. I've already proven you wrong in your assumptions about Swedes having the same smoking patterns as the rest of Europe.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by Hopeful

Longer life-span has also been attributed to other factors as mentioned in the numerous articles we have provided. You simply choose to ignore what has been proven. Just read the articles if you will and be honest with yourself. You were wrong in your assumptions about Swedes having the same smoking patterns as the rest of Europe.

Night has been attributed to the sun going underground.

Let me make sure I understand you: You are basically asserting that there is no data whatsoever which can be used to just the effect of anything at all on health because there will always be "other factors"?

If you are not asserting that, can you please offer me one example counter to that assertion?

[Hopeful]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Night has been attributed to the sun going underground.

Let me make sure I understand you: You are basically asserting that there is no data whatsoever which can be used to just the effect of anything at all on health because there will always be "other factors"?

If you are not asserting that, can you please offer me one example counter to that assertion?

Where do you get that there is no data whatsoever on other factors? I didn't write this stuff, but it is common sense and reasonable.

This is from the article I posted earlier. You probably did not read it because for each of the 10 countries mentioned, it states the factors that are responsible for their respective results.

"Want to live to a ripe old age? By far the most important factor in life expectancy is wealth; richer people tend to eat healthfully and smoke and drink less. They also have access to the best health care. Affluent countries also tend to have low rates of violent crime and civil unrest. The following countries have the highest average life expectancies in the world. In case you're wondering, the United States, with an average life expectancy of 77.85, ranks 48th."

10. Guernsey: 80.42 Years

The island of Guernsey, located in the English Channel, is a British Crown dependency, but it's not part of the U.K. The reason for its high life expectancy is simple: It's extremely wealthy. Very low taxes make Guernsey a popular destination for tax exiles who can afford the very best in nutrition and medical care. More than half of the island's income comes from financial services -- which means well-paid desk jobs -- with very few people working in heavy industry.

9. Australia: 80.50 Years

All the usual factors relating to prosperity apply here, but the life expectancy of indigenous Australians is about 20 years less than that of white Aussies, due to higher rates of just about every factor that shortens life, including smoking, obesity and poverty. Incidentally, research suggests that Australia's life expectancy may start falling as obesity reaches epidemic proportions in the land down under.

8. Switzerland: 80.51 (tied)

Aside from a stable economy with all of the usual factors that increase longevity, such as a healthful diet and high standard of health care, Switzerland's much-vaunted neutrality means that its inhabitants are highly unlikely to die in an armed conflict.

7. Sweden: 80.51 Years (tied)

Although an economic downturn in the late 1990s did some damage to Sweden's world-renowned welfare and public health systems, they are still among the best in the world. Also, Sweden has the lowest rate of smokers in the developed world -- about 17 percent -- so tobacco-related deaths are half the European average. Which results in lower deaths from lung cancer, both primary and secondary. (I added)

6. Japan: 81.25 Years

Japan has one of the lowest adult obesity rates in the industrialized world, at only 3 percent. As in Hong Kong, this is mainly due to a healthful diet based around vegetables, fish, rice and noodles. Many Japanese people also stop eating when they feel about 80 percent full, rather than continuing until they can't manage another mouthful. The Japanese are also much less reliant on cars than people in Western countries, preferring to walk whenever possible, and therefore get plenty of exercise.

5. Hong Kong: 81.59 Years

People in Hong Kong generally eat a healthful and balanced diet, based around rice, vegetables and tofu, with only small amounts of meat. This means that obesity rates are low, as are the rates for most dietary-based cancers and heart disease.

4. Singapore: 81.71 Years (tied)

Aside from prosperity, one factor in Singapore's long average life expectancy is that in the early 1980s, the government recognized that it had an aging population, with the average age of its citizens increasing steadily. The government planned accordingly, and now Singapore has excellent health care facilities for the elderly.

3. San Marino: 81.71 Years (tied)

This enclave in central Italy is the third smallest state in Europe (after Vatican City and Monaco), as well as the world's oldest republic. Here, the long life expectancy is due to prosperity and the fact that the majority of the population is involved in office-based work rather than heavy industry and labor, which shorten life spans.

2. Macau: 82.19 Years

This island in the South China Sea is reaping the rewards of a booming economy. The money has come from visitors, particularly from the Chinese mainland, coming to take advantage of a recently liberalized gaming industry. Gambling profits now provide about 70 percent of the country's income, and the government uses the money to invest heavily in public health care.

1. Andorra: 83.51 Years

Located between France and Spain, Andorra was one of Europe's poorest countries until it became a popular tourist destination after World War II. Its 71,000 inhabitants now enjoy all the benefits of a thriving economy, which include excellent nutrition and public health care facilities. So Andorra is smart, small and wealthy. Its people have access to good water, sanitation and health care. But there is at least one other factor that affects the life expectancy of Andorrans: They don't have to worry as much about being killed in an act of God -- their only natural hazards are avalanches.

Furthermore, "Residents of Okinawa, a Japanese island, have long been endowed with high life expectancies. In 2002, there were 34.7 people 100 years or older per 100,000 residents, the highest life expectancy of any area in the world [source: USA Today]. People so envy Okinawans' vitality that doctors created a popular diet based on theirs to help others try to live longer. Still, while Okinawa may feature the highest population of centenarians -- people who are 100 years of age or older -- Japan is ranked second in life expectancy with an average of 82."

To reiterate: "There are great variations in life expectancy worldwide, mostly caused by differences in public health, medical care and diet from country to country. Much of the early death in poorer nations is due to war, starvation, or diseases (Aids, Malaria). Over the past 200 years, countries with Black or African citizens have not had improvements in the mortality rates that persons in colonials countries have. And even in colonial countries (America, England, France), Black citizens have shorter life expectancies than their white counterparts. Climate may also have an effect, and the way data is collected may also be an important influence. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Andorra has the world's longest life expectancy of 83.5 years.

There are also variations between groups within single countries. For example, in the U.S. non-Latino Whites are expected to live until age 78, but African Americans only until age 71 [24]. Significant differences still remain in life expectancy between men and women in France and other developed countries, with women outliving men by five years or more. On average women tend to live until 80 years old whereas men are only expected to live until 74 [24]. These gender differences have been increasing in recent years. Poverty, in particular, has a very substantial effect on life expectancy. In the United Kingdom life expectancy in the wealthiest areas is on average ten years longer than the poorest areas and the gap appears to be increasing as life expectancy for the prosperous continues to increase while in more deprived communities there is little increase.[25] However, in Glasgow the disparity is among the highest in the world with life expectancy for males in the heavily deprived Calton standing at 54 – 28 years less than in the affluent area of Lenzie, which is only eight kilometres away.[26][27]

Life expectancy may also be reduced for people exposed to high levels of highway air pollution[citation needed] or industrial air pollution. Occupation may also have a major effect on life expectancy. Well-educated professionals working in offices have a high life expectancy, while coal miners (and in prior generations, asbestos cutters) do not. Other factors affecting an individual's life expectancy are genetic disorders, obesity, access to health care, diet, exercise, tobacco smoking, and excessive drug and alcohol use."

[Hopeful]

Oh yeah, what about the obesity stats as reported by the WHO that Bryan posted? Those are measurable...unless you want to assert that there are no associated health risks due to obesity.

[tlj009]

But you could send a birthday card or bill by UPS/FedEx. It would not be as cheap as USPS, and it cannot be placed in a USPS mailbox, but there's no law against it (which was noli's claim).

And no. USPS, mostly because of scale of letter-delivery, offers the least expensive letter service.

First, I am the one who argued with you about USPS and I am not noli.

Second, it was not my claim.

Third, USPS offers the least expensive letter service because they are the only ones who can offer letter service without a rush. Whether it takes them 1 day or 6 months doesn't matter. So in essence, companies are only competing with USPS's Express Mail, which is still not exactly the same. Compare that to your comment

Then why doesn't FedEx, UPS< Airborne, DHL, etc have a thriving letter, junk-mail, etc business?

Express mail is simply not "letter, junk-mail, etc. And my answer of because USPS has a monopoly is 100% correct.

[grand_master_d]

I think you're being awfully unfair right now, Jerry.

I'd say Swedes have a longer life-span than Americans due to many factors, many of which are "measurable", and many of which have been listed in this debate - Hopeful listed figures for both smoking and obesity. It's not an unreasonable claim to make. Sure, their health care could be (and probably is) a factor as well - but that is not measurable in and of itself, and it's certainly not any more measurable than any other obvious factor like lifestyle choices, genetic makeup, population...

Like I mentioned a couple of days ago - I think of this like some infomercial for a new diet/supplement craze. Sure, the product can and probably does work; but just how measurable it is is dependent upon many, many other factors - your genes, your diet, your exercise... it's fine print.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

But you could send a birthday card or bill by UPS/FedEx. It would not be as cheap as USPS, and it cannot be placed in a USPS mailbox, but there's no law against it (which was noli's claim).

And no. USPS, mostly because of scale of letter-delivery, offers the least expensive letter service.

UPS has acually been worse at getting fragile things moved than USPS lately (it used to be reversed). I've not tried shipping something heavy and fragile with FedEx lately.

..and don't get me started on Delta. I think they have a cargo catapult.

And that's my point. Private companies have come in and competed against USPS successfully in areas where better service could be offered. If USPS were gone tomorrow, it would not benefit the consumer.

Well being a postal worker- I do know that there is a law that forbids anyone from putting nonpostal (meaning products with postage on it) material inside a mailbox. It is almost never enforced- usually incriminal cases to get to the bigger cries. If you put a fed ex envelope in a mail box- unless you specify fed ex to pick it up- it will stay there. we as carriers are not allowed to pick up other co. mailings. And fed ex could rightfully refuse to pick up that envelope. Inside the mail; box is federal property. But let me stress again the law is rarely enforced.

Teh reason why UPS and FEd EX excel in their niches is that they only ship certain size (dimension) and weight parcels. They limit what they will handle and as a resxult they do an excellent job in what they do. Fed Ex and UPS also do not deliver to every address in teh USA. Daily the big BMC facility near my house receives trailers from both companies dropping parcels off to locations they don't deliver to.

The USPS is mandated to deliver to every address in the country. We handle the flimsiest post card to phone books. We deliver coconuts, baseball bats, boxes of bees and chicks. The USPS is the best in the world. Our 1-2 and 3 day delivery standards all exceed 98%- there is much inefficiency in the POST OFFICE but with 650,000 employees scattered over 32,000 buildings- well its to be expected. Also the Postal Service is a wholly owned independent subsuduary of the Govt. We recieve no subsidies and are independent of the fed budget. We rise and fall solely on the sale of stamps (postage)

And as this thread was addressed to not me I will continue to stay out, but I am a loyal letter carrier and am proud of the service I brting my patrons.

[grand_master_d]

Where'd Jerry go?