If you haven’t seen the Daniel Hannan interview on Fox yet, read the transcript or watch the video linked here. Remember it when it comes around to the next set of elections, remember to get rid. Anyhow…

Sean Hannity says the results of state run healthcare “aren’t pretty”.

Daniel Hannan says that going the way of state run healthcare would leave the USA “bankrupt” and that the NHS is a “relic we can’t get rid of”.

The Guardian’s DataBlog linked to the WHO’s World Health Statistics 2009 report. The Guardian’s got an extract of various statistics there in an easy tabular form, but I want to concentrate on three countries, and a few bits of data from that report combined with some others. I’m looking at the US, Canada and Britain, as those are the ones being focussed on by the US press. The statistics I want to look at are two which relate to two basic things – not dying in childbirth, and not dying before you’re five.I’ve taken live births for 2004 from Statistics Canada, the Office Of National Statistics in the UK and the Department Of Health And Human Services in the USA (via InfoPlease). The under 5s mortality rate per 1,000 live births, and maternal mortality per 100,000 live births are both from the WHO report. Most of the other statistics in there are favourable towards Canada and the UK as well, although the cancer mortality rates aren’t. Might be worth looking into incidence and prevalence with those as well.

There were 4,112,052 live births in the USA in 2004. The infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births was 8, and the maternal mortality per 100,000 live births was 11. 452 women died, and 32,896 children didn’t make it to their fifth birthday.

In Canada, the infant rate was 6 and the maternal rate was 7. Applying that to the American birth rate would mean 288 women would have died, and 24,672 children would not have made it to five.

In the UK, the infant rate was 6 and the maternal rate was 8. Applying that to the American birth rate would mean 329 women would have died, and 24,672 children would not have made it to five.

Using the Canadian system in the USA would have saved 164 women from dying in childbirth, and 8,224 more children would have made it to five years old. Using the British system would have saved 123 women and 8,224 children.

Part of the reason you hear for American’s not wanting something like the NHS is that it equates to ‘big government’ and higher taxes. The other interesting part from the WHO report is to look at the spending per capita (this time it’s 2006 figures).

The USA spent $6,719 per capita on healthcare (private – $3,642, government – $3,077), and the gross national income per capita was $45,850.

Canada spent $3,673 per capita on healthcare (private – $1,087, government – $2,586), and the gross national income per capita was $35,310.

The UK spent $2,815 per capita on healthcare (private – $358, government – $2,457), and the gross national income per capita was $33,800.

The American system costs the average person 14.65% of their income – they spend 7.94%, the state spends 6.71%.

The Canadian system costs the average person 10.40% of their income – they spend 3.08%, the state spends 7.32%.

The British system costs the average person 8.33% of their income – they spend 1.06%, the state spends 7.27%.

Using the Canadian system in the USA would save the average person $1,949 per year ($2,229 less on private, $280 more on state). Using the British system in the USA would save the average person $2,900 per year ($3,157 less on private, $256 more on state).

Let’s extrapolate that to the total US population of 305,826,000 people (WHO report again).

Using the Canadian system in the USA would save a total of $596,242,388,384. Using the British system in the USA would save a total of $887,026,145,139.

I wonder why the healthcare industry in the US might not want reforms…