Not to be redundant here with the health care threads; however, I wish to be the first to critisize the WHO’s new World Health Report for 2000.
Most importantly, the WHO unfairly places more emphasis on the distribution of care and what it calls fair than the level or effectiveness of care. To quote the report most directly, “Goodness and fairness:both level and distribution matter.” Thw WHO claims that this report is intended to help people improve their health care systems, yet it seems more important to them that everbody gets the exact same coverage. Consider the five factors that govern a nation’s standing,
“WHO’s assessment system was based on five indicators: overall level of population health; health inequalities (or disparities) within the population; overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts); distribution of responsiveness within the population (how well people of varying economic status find that they are served by the health system); and the distribution of the health system’s financial burden within the population (who pays the costs).”
The fundamental flaw here is the assumption that the overall level of health system responsiveness and general population health is best achieved through a socialist health system. Never mind if a capitalist system ACTUALLY DELIVERS BETTER CARE, IT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAT EVERYONE SUFFER THE SAME BAD HEALTH CARE. The WHO gladly acknowledges that the US has essentially the best health care response available, the most direct measure of actual health system performance, we still come in well behind of France, Spain, Italy, and Oman even though our life spans beat out all of these countries.
P.S. In the WHO’s statistic on Usefull Life Span, people with major dissabilities such as parapalegics are relavantly dead to the WHO. It does not matter if you work as a mechanical engineer with a Ph.D. and then go flash 5.10s on El Cap over the weekend, your life must be useless, according to the WHO.