The Case Against a European Health Model for America

Stock up on your Mountain Dew: Code Red, M&Ms, and Swedish Fish -- while these iconic items aren’t necessarily disappearing, a relatively minor but controversial component of their chemical anatomy will be phased out by 2027: Red 40. This synthetic dye will join the ranks of brominated substances and propylparabens.

Red 40’s forced retirement comes amid growing pressure from the populace demanding elimination of the dye from food items due to safety concerns. This is an example of the free market operating as intended -- the food industry responding to consumer wants and needs. But it didn’t stop here, the government couldn’t resist the opportunity to step in, intervene and oversee the ban. Two issues arose in light of this event. First, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s incessant need to oversee the process, creating a regulation and granting the necessary authority to conduct inspections and audit facilities as the bureaucracy deems appropriate.

The second, and more contentious, observation is the emergence of an ideology within the health movement that seeks to model the U.S. healthcare approach after Europe. This perspective has even been touted and endorsed, at times, by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the newly confirmed Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). While it is true that certain parts of Europe generally exhibit lower rates of obesity, type II diabetes, and some psychiatric conditions, the underlying reasons for these differences are complex and multifaceted. Mirroring Europe's heavy regulatory policies concerning health may prove moot.

The countries that comprise Europe -- specifically within the context of the European Union (EU) -- present a complex mosaic of health and disease.

When you read about healthcare related issues in QUORA for example,

A popular type of ammunition supporting the pro-Europe stance is a widely circulated graph on social media highlighting America's poor healthcare outcomes in comparison to many other countries, most of which are part of the EU. This also serves as great illustration of the complexities that encompass healthcare in a diverse and free nation. SEE HERE:

The graph highlights poor health outcomes alongside exceptionally high healthcare costs, yet it fails to account for several important factors. Americans generally face higher rates of drug-related issues, drive more frequently than Europeans -- more car accidents, experience higher homicide rates, Americans love ultra-processed foods which are calorie dense and can lean to higher obesity rates compared to Europeans.

To align U.S. trends with those of other countries, one might suggest a range of drastic measures: banning driving, restricting alcohol, prohibiting firearms, eliminating junk food, or even imposing heavy taxes on gasoline and implementing environmental policies to discourage car ownership, similar to Europe's approach. Having the freedom with the risks, is better than not having the freedom at all -- despite the costs.

Countless other examples could be given, but the reality remains: America is a vast country, geographically and culturally diverse. This diversity plays a significant role in the variations in healthcare outcomes between the United States and Europe. Culturally, Europeans approach mealtime, diet, and portion control in ways that differ substantially from Americans. Even their fast-food meals are portioned for caloric restriction -- royale with cheese anyone? While Europeans have stricter standards regarding food components and additives, the focus on these factors may be misplaced; it could be their overall diets, rather than individual additives, that have a more significant impact on their health. This principle applies to nutrition as a whole.

Europeans' greater reliance on public transportation, walking, or cycling may be larger contributors to the general health disparities when comparing the two nations. However, Americans must recognize that emulating Europe often involves embracing significant government oversight and principles that are contrary to core American values. The most effective way for Americans to address health issues and healthcare costs is by making responsible health decisions through the power of individual freedom. Encouragingly, it appears many Americans are already taking these steps.

First, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s incessant need to oversee the process, creating a regulation and granting the necessary authority to conduct inspections and audit facilities as the bureaucracy deems appropriate.

Yet another example of a regulation that wasn't needed. Such regs are "full employment acts" for federal agencies. Because Congress doesn't perform oversight on these agencies as required, they go unchecked passing regs that aren't needed. Then, why do they create such regs? Two reasons: 1) they have no incentive to be efficient regardless of the impact on who they are regulating, and 2) the social standing of the directors is directly proportional to the number of employees they control. That means more invitations to the "big whig" parties in DC and a chance to hobnob with the important people. Do we need 16,000+ people working at the EPA? Probably not, if they just did what they are supposed to do and Congress checked in on them once and a while.

I recall that during the debate on Obamacare, when the left was making bank on the U.S.’s lagging performance on life expectancy, that if one corrected for vehicular fatalities and homicides, the U.S. was at or near the top in life expectancy among OECD countries.

Correct for obesity and drug and alcohol issues, and the U.S. performance is further improved, by a huge amount.

The U.S. also had the best overall outcomes for survival rates among people after diagnosis with an organic disease actually related to health care system outcomes (e.g., the various cancers, heart disease, and a dozen others). The U.S. also had by far the best outcomes in neonatal care and care for the very elderly. We provide care for patients that the rest of the world just medicates and waits for death. This care at both ends of the age spectrum is what drives a lot of the cost in the U.S. system. I personally think we spend far too much money hooking people up to exotic high tech treatments in the last months of life, but that’s a separate debate.

Lifestyle, lifestyle, lifestyle. Americans are couch potatoes because so many large American cities had their key growth periods in the post-automobile age. For over 60 years now, we have built car-centric cities and suburbs that promote sedentary lifestyles, and this is exacerbated by long commutes. The best solution would be for Americans to get out and walk a lot more, but the car obsessives have engineered our cities to undercut that. And it’s not the doctors’ fault if Americans order out for pizza and buy microwaveable, highly processed convenience foods at the grocery rather than cook the fresh vegetables and lean meats that your Safeway would love to sell you.

Violent crime in the U.S. is overwhelmingly concentrated in areas with some pretty obvious demographic correlates. That is another factor that liberals usually conflate with health care outcomes, as if doctors have any control over gangbangers battling for turf and revenge.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.