 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Economy Forum » U.S. Infant Mortality Rates Rising |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Guest |
 Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:29 pm |
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 22:33:38 -0500, "Steven L. Robinson"
<srobin21@comcast.net> wrote:
[quote:acc70fd158](The fact that the U.S. infant mortality rate is rising is a profound
national disgrace. The U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate than the rest
of the industrial world, indeed it has a higher rate of infant deaths than
the much maligned country of Cuba. Interestingly, the rates are highest in
the American Southeast, the so-called "Bible Belt," Wal-Mart Country. SR)
[/quote:acc70fd158]
As I have already explained, part or all of this discrepancy with
other countries is due to the way newborns' deaths are classified. In
most countries, severely malformed, premature and underweight infants
that cannot breathe on their own when delivered are classed as "fetal
death" (i.e., stillborn) and little or no attempt is made to ventilate
them artificially. They do not appear in "infant mortality"
statistics. In the USA, such cases are routinely ventilated by
machine; then if they don't make it (which many don't), they are
classed as "infant deaths." I'm sure you remember all those scenes
from historical dramas where the newborn's cry was the proof that they
were not born dead. If you extract the infant deaths following
mechanical ventilation, the US infant mortality rate would be not so
different from those in other advanced countries.
-- Roy L |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Quirk |
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
royls@telus.net wrote:
[quote:73c8394606]If you extract the infant deaths following
mechanical ventilation, the US infant mortality rate would be not so
different from those in other advanced countries.
[/quote:73c8394606]
Do you have a citation that supports this? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Steven L. Robinson |
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
But, how do you explain the fact that in the US the infant mortality rate
for African Americans is DOUBLE
that for the population as a whole? That is not a question of
classification of newborn deaths assuming, arguendo, you had the evidence to
back up the claim you make below. SR
<royls@telus.net> wrote in message
news:436910a7.24308463@news1.qc.sympatico.ca...
[quote:dd9ec1cb81]On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 22:33:38 -0500, "Steven L. Robinson"
srobin21@comcast.net> wrote:
(The fact that the U.S. infant mortality rate is rising is a profound
national disgrace. The U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate than the
rest
of the industrial world, indeed it has a higher rate of infant deaths
than
the much maligned country of Cuba. Interestingly, the rates are highest
in
the American Southeast, the so-called "Bible Belt," Wal-Mart Country. SR)
As I have already explained, part or all of this discrepancy with
other countries is due to the way newborns' deaths are classified. In
most countries, severely malformed, premature and underweight infants
that cannot breathe on their own when delivered are classed as "fetal
death" (i.e., stillborn) and little or no attempt is made to ventilate
them artificially. They do not appear in "infant mortality"
statistics. In the USA, such cases are routinely ventilated by
machine; then if they don't make it (which many don't), they are
classed as "infant deaths." I'm sure you remember all those scenes
from historical dramas where the newborn's cry was the proof that they
were not born dead. If you extract the infant deaths following
mechanical ventilation, the US infant mortality rate would be not so
different from those in other advanced countries.
-- Roy L[/quote:dd9ec1cb81] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am |
|
|
|
|
On 3 Nov 2005 12:38:05 -0800, "Quirk" <quirk@syntac.net> wrote:
[quote:53b9655fa9]royls@telus.net wrote:
If you extract the infant deaths following
mechanical ventilation, the US infant mortality rate would be not so
different from those in other advanced countries.
Do you have a citation that supports this?
[/quote:53b9655fa9]
No, I read about it a few months back. Google might be able to track
it down, but I don't have the time.
-- Roy L |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Quirk |
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
royls@telus.net wrote:
[quote:353fe3beef]On 3 Nov 2005 12:38:05 -0800, "Quirk" <quirk@syntac.net> wrote:
royls@telus.net wrote:
If you extract the infant deaths following
mechanical ventilation, the US infant mortality rate would be not so
different from those in other advanced countries.
Do you have a citation that supports this?
No, I read about it a few months back. Google might be able to track
it down, but I don't have the time.
[/quote:353fe3beef]
As I found this issue important and your claim hard to believe, I did
spend some time to track down the results you suggest. Thanks for the
tip.
However, while you do appear correct in that definition of fetal death
versus infant mortality does play a role in the infant mortality rate
rankings, the difference in the US ranking apprears to be not as
dramaticaly affected as you believe.
The most direct study I can cite is one from 2002 (using 1985 data)
that actually asks the exact question you raise, and then publishes a
"corrected" ranking which includes Fetal Death and Infant Mortality
Rate.
http://sociweb.tamu.edu/Faculty/POSTON/Postonweb/soci312-Spring02/lecture2.doc
The US does do better in the correct rankings, however only by a small
margin, rising to 15th place from 18th. The only really dramatic
changes is France falling 9th place to 16th, and Ireland falling from
11 to 19, with East Germany (!) and Australia both making more
substantial gains upward than the US from this ranking.
Leaders such as Japan, Finland, and Sweden perform far above US levels,
as do middling countries including Hong Kong and Canada. The US remains
among the lagards such as New Zealand and Belgium.
[quote:353fe3beef]From the above cited study:
[/quote:353fe3beef]
IMR
RANK IMR LIVE STILL- INF'T ID TOTAL NEW
1985 COUNTRY 1985 BIRTHS BIRTHS DEATHS Ratio RISK RANK
1 Japan 5.5 1,431,577 7,762 7.899 0.98 10.9 3
2 Finland 6.3 62,796 241 396 0.61 10.1 1
3 Sweden 6.8 98,463 388 666 0.58 10.7 2
4 Switzerland 6.9 74,684 345 515 0.67 11.5 5
5 Hong Kong 7.5 76,126 295 572 0.52 11.3 4
6 Canada 7.9 375,727 1,629 2,982 0.55 12.2 6
6 Denmark 7.9 53,749 236 427 0.55 12.3 7
8 Netherlands 8.0 178,136 1,054 1,430 0.74 13.9 9
9 France 8.3 768,431 5,658 6,389 0.89 15.6 16
10 Norway 8.5 51,134 279 434 0.64 13.9 9
11 Ireland 8.9 62,175 516 552 0.93 17.0 19
11 Germany (W) 8.9 586,155 2,414 5,244 0.46 13.0 8
13 Singapore 9.3 42,484 227 394 0.58 14.5 11
14 UK 9.4 750,728 4,189 7.030 0.60 14.9 14
14 Belgium 9.4 114,030 764 1,073 0.71 16.0 18
16 Germany (E) 9.6 227,648 1,187 2,175 0.55 14.7 12
17 Australia 10.1 242,910 1,128 2,452 0.46 14.7 12
18 US 10.6 3,760,561 18,703 40,030 0.47 15.5 15
19 NZ 10.8 51,798 254 560 0.45 15.6 16
(sorry of this table is mangled in your display) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 9:03 am |
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:25:08 -0500, "Steven L. Robinson"
<srobin21@comcast.net> wrote:
[quote:8988c03d95]But, how do you explain the fact that in the US the infant mortality rate
for African Americans is DOUBLE that for the population as a whole?
[/quote:8988c03d95]
Well, it is certainly the case that African Americans' health is
generally worse than average. I can think of several reasons why
African American women would be more likely to deliver distressed
babies unable to breathe on their own:
1. poverty-related inferior prenatal care
2. use of illegal drugs
3. higher risk of STDs, AIDS, TB, hepatitis, diabetes, etc.
4. poverty-related poor nutrition
5. narrow pelvic openings
6. very low maternal age
7. stressful domestic situations
And that probably does not exhaust the possibilities.
[quote:8988c03d95]That is not a question of
classification of newborn deaths
[/quote:8988c03d95]
It very well might be, depending on what caused those deaths. See
above.
-- Roy L |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:40 pm
|
|