PDA

View Full Version : U.S. lagging behind many other nations on infant mortality rates


rastaman
08-19-2009, 05:23 PM
U.S. lagging behind many other nations on infant mortality rates: Healthy behavior, healthier babies

by Kim Krisberg

Like other startling health statistics, the U.S. infant mortality rate easily elicits both sighs of frustration and words of determination from health workers — frustration from knowing many such deaths are preventable and determination from knowing that a poor infant mortality rate does not bode well for the nation’s future health prospects.

In response, health workers at national, state and local levels are coming together to address the issue. In Virginia, for example, health workers are harnessing their frustration and determination to bring the old proverb "it takes a village to raise a child" to life. Gathering a diverse group of stakeholders to the public health table, workers are determined to tackle "this unseen epidemic," said Phil Giaramita, spokesman for the Virginia Department of Health’s new Commissioner’s Working Group on Infant Mortality. Faced with a state infant mortality rate that claims the lives of seven times more children each year than car accidents do, the Virginia group is busy developing community-based strategies to improve the health of pregnant women, new moms and babies. And the state isn’t alone in confronting what Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine has called the state’s "most glaring health failure." Declines in infant mortality rates nationwide have stalled and the country’s global infant mortality ranking has, sadly, increased.

Premature infants receive care at a New York City medical center in 2004. Increasing premature births is one of the reasons for the high infant mortality rate in the United States. Photo by Mario Tama, courtesy Getty Images

Released in October 2008, a new data brief from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics ranks the United States 29th globally in infant mortality in 2004, the latest year such data were available for all countries. The U.S. ranking, which has risen from 12th in 1960 to 23rd in 1990, currently ties the United States with Poland and Slovakia.

Authors of the brief, "Recent Trends in Infant Mortality in the United States," noted that while such global comparisons can be affected by reporting differences, "it appears unlikely that differences in reporting are the primary explanation for the United States’ relatively low international ranking."

According to the brief, the U.S. infant mortality rate in 2005 was 6.86 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, not much different than the 6.89 rate in 2000 — a lack of decline that has "generated concern among researchers and policy-makers." In fact, the level rate from 2000–2005 represents the first period of ongoing lack of decline in the U.S. infant mortality rate since the 1950s, the brief stated. The Healthy People 2010 target for infant mortality is 4.5 infant deaths per 1,000 live births.

In 2005, 28,000 infants younger than age 1 died, out of more than 4.1 million births. Among those deaths were glaring disparities: The brief reported that the infant mortality rate was 13.68 deaths per 1,000 live births among blacks in 2005, 8.06 among American Indians and Alaska Natives, 8.3 among Puerto Ricans and 5.76 among whites.

The lowest U.S. rate was among Cuban Americans, at 4.42. While a number of factors can contribute to such disparities, such as access to care and socioeconomic status, the brief’s authors found that "many of the racial and ethnic differences in infant mortality remain unexplained." However, one factor researchers know is affecting U.S. infant mortality rates is preterm birth. In 2005, more than 68 percent of infant deaths occurred among preterm infants, up from more than 65 percent in 2000. In November, the March of Dimes released its first annual "Premature Birth Report Card," giving the nation an overall "D" grade and noting that preterm birth — birth before 37 weeks of gestation — is the top cause of death in an infant’s first month of life.

"Our lack of progress really is related to more and more babies being born too small," said Joann Petrini, PhD, MPH, director of the March of Dimes’ Perinatal Data Center. "Because of amazing high-tech care, thankfully, we see miraculous outcomes for very, very small babies...but it can make it difficult to communicate that prematurity is still a problem."

Forty weeks is the normal length for pregnancy, but even babies born between 34 weeks and 36 weeks — known as late preterm — have a death rate three times that of full-term babies, said Petrini, adding that "40 weeks is 40 weeks for a reason." Petrini said an increase in late preterm births has been driving up the overall preterm birth rate, which NCHS reported in January rose to 12.8 percent in 2006, up 36 percent since the early 1980s.

Babies born premature can later suffer a number of problems, including developmental disabilities, hearing loss, blindness and chronic diseases such as asthma. Though many behavioral factors, such as smoking, lack of breastfeeding and a rise in medically unnecessary Caesarean sections, are known to contribute to the U.S. infant mortality and prematurity rates, much is unknown.

http://www.apha.org/publications/tnh/archives/2009/February09/Nation/BabiesNAT.htm

epicSocialism4tw
08-19-2009, 05:38 PM
Well, if we are concerned about infant mortality, it would probably be a good idea to quit inducing labor, stabbing them in the head with scissors, chopping up their brain, vacuuming out whats left of the brain with a hose, delivering the dead child, and then throwing it away.

It would probably be a good idea to start there.

rastaman
08-19-2009, 05:54 PM
Well, if we are concerned about infant mortality, it would probably be a good idea to quit inducing labor, stabbing them in the head with scissors, chopping up their brain, vacuuming out whats left of the brain with a hose, delivering the dead child, and then throwing it away.

It would probably be a good idea to start there.

Look here you conservative IDIOT, For profit private healthcare insurers would gladly allow that NEW BORN to DIE versus treating the infant would disrupt their profit margins. Wake up BOZO!!!

epicSocialism4tw
08-19-2009, 05:59 PM
Look here you conservative IDIOT, For profit private healthcare insurers would gladly allow that NEW BORN to DIE versus treating the infant would disrupt their profit margins. Wake up BOZO!!!

Put down the bong, go wash your dreads, and get a job.

rastaman
08-19-2009, 06:23 PM
Put down the bong, go wash your dreads, and get a job.

So how long have you been snorting lines of coke with GW Bush!!!! Hilarious!

epicSocialism4tw
08-19-2009, 06:42 PM
So how long have you been snorting lines of coke with GW Bush!!!! Hilarious!

Wow.

Excessive pot use must irreparably damage the parts of the brain that associate good humor and delivery.

rastaman
08-20-2009, 01:20 PM
Wow.

Excessive pot use must irreparably damage the parts of the brain that associate good humor and delivery.

So has GW Bush suffered irreparble brain damage b/c he abused cocaine, alcohol, and pot for over 25 years???? Perhaps this explains why he raped the english language for 8 long years.

Garcia Bronco
08-20-2009, 01:33 PM
IMR and IDR are fraud statistics. And for years many countries were not taking simple measures to prevent Infant deaths. Education on things like oral hydration have stopped infants from dying in most countries. The US hasn't gone down as much as other contries have gone up. If you are born here you'll have a better chance than most places at a long life.

Rohirrim
08-20-2009, 01:42 PM
Well, if we are concerned about infant mortality, it would probably be a good idea to quit inducing labor, stabbing them in the head with scissors, chopping up their brain, vacuuming out whats left of the brain with a hose, delivering the dead child, and then throwing it away.

It would probably be a good idea to start there.

Right. And then what do I do for lunch?

cutthemdown
08-20-2009, 01:46 PM
Rasta do some more research bud.

http://www.drwalt.com/blog/2009/07/06/health-myth-1-%E2%80%9Cthe-us-has-one-of-the-highest-infant-mortality-rates-in-the-developed-world%E2%80%9D/


Monday, 6 July 2009 <!-- by Dr. Walt -->
This is the first in a series of commonly reported, and even more commonly believed, health myths. This series is based upon the research from Fox News analyst James Farrell.
More Information:
Talk about stretching a point until it snaps. This ranking is based on some very flawed data and assumptions.
The U.S. ranks high on this list largely because this country numbers among those that actually measure neonatal deaths, notably in premature infant fatalities, unlike other countries that basically leave premature babies to die, notes health analyst Betsey McCaughey.
Other statistical quirks push the U.S. unjustifiably higher in this ranking compared to other countries.
The Center for Disease Control says the U.S. ranks 29th in the world for infant mortality rates, (according to the CDC), behind most other developed nations.
The U.S. is supposedly worse than Singapore, Hong Kong, Greece, Northern Ireland, Cuba and Hungary. And the U.S. is supposedly on a par with Slovakia and Poland.
CNN, the New York Times, numerous outlets across the country report the U.S. as abysmal in terms of infant mortality, without delving into what is behind this ranking.
The Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit research group, routinely flunks the U.S. health system using the infant mortality rate.
“Infant mortality and our comparison with the rest of the world continue to be an embarrassment to the United States,” Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, a research organization, has said.
First, let’s start with the definition. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines a country’s infant mortality rate as the number of infants who die between birth and age one, per 1,000 live births.
WHO says a live birth is when a baby shows any signs of life, even if, say, a low birth weight baby takes one, single breath, or has one heartbeat. While the U.S. uses this definition, other countries don’t and so don’t count premature or severely ill babies as live births-or deaths.
The United States counts all births if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size or duration of life, notes Bernardine Healy, a former director of the National Institutes of Health and former president and chief executive of the American Red Cross (Healy noted this information in a column for U.S. News & World Report).
And that includes stillbirths, which many other countries don’t report.
And what counts as a birth varies from country to country. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) before these countries count these infants as live births, Healy notes.
In other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long, Healy notes. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless, and are not counted, Healy says.
And some countries don’t reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth, Healy notes.
Norway, which has one of the lowest infant mortality rates, shows no better infant survival than the United States when you factor in Norway’s underweight infants that are not now counted, Healy says, quoting Nicholas Eberstadt, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
Moreover, the ranking doesn’t take into account that the US has a diverse, heterogeneous population, Healy adds, unlike, say, in Iceland, which tracks all infant deaths regardless of factor, but has a population under 300,000 that is 94% homogenous.
Likewise, Finland and Japan do not have the ethnic and cultural diversity of the U.S.’s 300 cm-plus citizens.
Plus, the U.S. has a high rate of teen pregnancies, teens who smoke, who take drugs, who are obese and uneducated, all factors which cause higher infant mortality rates.
And the US has more mothers taking fertility treatments, which keeps the rate of pregnancy high due to multiple-birth pregnancies.
Again, the U.S. counts all of these infants as births. Moreover, we’re not losing healthy babies, as the scary stats imply. Most of the babies that die are either premature or born seriously ill, including those with congenital malformations.
Even the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, cautions against using comparisons country-by-country.
“Some of the international variation in infant and neonatal mortality rates may be due to variations among countries in registering practices of premature infants (whether they are reported as live births or not),” the OECD says.
“In several countries, such as in the United States, Canada and the Nordic countries, very premature babies (with relatively low odds of survival) are registered as live births, which increases mortality rates compared with other countries that do not register them as live births.” (Note: Emphasis EMac’s).
The U.S. ranks much better on a measure that the World Health Organization says is more accurate, the perinatal mortality rate, defined as death between 22 weeks’ gestation and 7 days after birth.
According to the WHO 2006 report on Neonatal and Perinatal Mortality, the U.S. comes in at 16th-and even higher if you knock out several tiny countries with tiny birthrates and populations, such as Martinique, Hong Kong, and San Marino.

cutthemdown
08-20-2009, 01:48 PM
USA counts any baby, any size, that shows even one glimmer of life upon being born. Many times we also count still born as infant deaths. Other countries use different criteria and therefore can not be used as a comparison.

Even stupid lefties can understand this I would think.

Spider
08-20-2009, 06:36 PM
As afather of 4 high risk babies ( my 8 year old and the triplets) I got to say , this can be one of the most misleading stats of all time , for example women smoke , drink , dont do prenatal etc ............ good grief I took an LOA from work for 3 months strait to be with my wife for dr appointments, care for the older kids etc ........ we did everything by the book and my kids turned out just fine ........ and the trips was given less then a 27% chance at living ........

cutthemdown
08-24-2009, 01:37 PM
I like how once someone makes a point to rasta he just runs from the thread.