**  **

Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death in the US, Causing
225,000 Deaths Every Year

**This article in the Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA) is the best article I have ever seen written in the published
literature documenting the tragedy of the traditional medical
paradigm.**

If you want to keep updated on issues like this click here to sign up
for my free newsletter.

This information is a followup of the Institute of Medicine report
which hit the papers in December of last year, but the data was hard
to reference as it was not in peer-reviewed journal. Now it is
published in JAMA which is the most widely circulated medical
periodical in the world.

The author is Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of
Hygiene and Public Health and she desribes how the US health care
system may contribute to poor health.

**ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:**

12,000 -- unnecessary surgery
7,000 -- medication errors in hospitals
20,000 -- other errors in hospitals
80,000 -- infections in hospitals
106,000 -- non-error, negative effects of drugs
These total to 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes!!
What does the word iatrogenic mean? This term is defined as induced in
a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. Used
especially of a complication of treatment.

Dr. Starfield offers several warnings in interpreting these numbers:

First, most of the data are derived from studies in hospitalized
patients.
Second, these estimates are for deaths only and do not include
negative effects that are associated with disability or discomfort.
Third, the estimates of death due to error are lower than those in the
IOM report.
**If the higher estimates are used, the deaths due to iatrogenic
causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000. In any case, 225,000
deaths per year constitutes the third leading cause of death in the
United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer. Even if
these figures are overestimated, there is a wide margin between these
numbers of deaths and the next leading cause of death (cerebrovascular
disease).**

Another analysis concluded that between 4% and 18% of consecutive
patients experience negative effects in outpatient settings,with:

116 million extra physician visits
77 million extra prescriptions
17 million emergency department visits
8 million hospitalizations
3 million long-term admissions
199,000 additional deaths
$77 billion in extra costs
The high cost of the health care system is considered to be a deficit,
but seems to be tolerated under the assumption that better health
results from more expensive care.

However, evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to
30% of patients receive inappropriate care.

An estimated 44,000 to 98,000 among them die each year as a result of
medical errors.

This might be tolerated if it resulted in better health, but does it?
Of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an
average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health
indicators. More specifically, the ranking of the US on several
indicators was:

13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall
11th for postneonatal mortality
13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
11th for life expectancy at 1 year for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 15 years for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 40 years for females, 9th for males
7th for life expectancy at 65 years for females, 7th for males
3rd for life expectancy at 80 years for females, 3rd for males
10th for age-adjusted mortality
The poor performance of the US was recently confirmed by a World
Health Organization study, which used different data and ranked the
United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries.

There is a perception that the American public "behaves badly" by
smoking, drinking, and perpetrating violence." However the data does
not support this assertion.

The proportion of females who smoke ranges from 14% in Japan to 41% in
Denmark; in the United States, it is 24% (fifth best). For males, the
range is from 26% in Sweden to 61% in Japan; it is 28% in the United
States (third best).
The US ranks fifth best for alcoholic beverage consumption.
The US has relatively low consumption of animal fats (fifth lowest in
men aged 55-64 years in 20 industrialized countries) and the third
lowest mean cholesterol concentrations among men aged 50 to 70 years
among 13 industrialized countries.
These estimates of death due to error are lower than those in a recent
Institutes of Medicine report, and if the higher estimates are used,
the deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to
284,000.

Even at the lower estimate of 225,000 deaths per year, this
constitutes the third leading cause of death in the US, following
heart disease and cancer.

Lack of technology is certainly not a contributing factor to the US's
low ranking.

Among 29 countries, the United States is second only to Japan in the
availability of magnetic resonance imaging units and computed
tomography scanners per million population. 17
Japan, however, ranks highest on health, whereas the US ranks among
the lowest.
It is possible that the high use of technology in Japan is limited to
diagnostic technology not matched by high rates of treatment, whereas
in the US, high use of diagnostic technology may be linked to more
treatment.
Supporting this possibility are data showing that the number of
employees per bed (full-time equivalents) in the United States is
highest among the countries ranked, whereas they are very low in
Japan, far lower than can be accounted for by the common practice of
having family members rather than hospital staff provide the amenities
of hospital care.
Journal American Medical Association July 26, 2000;284(4):483-5

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**DR .MERCOLA'S COMMENT:**

Folks, this is what they call a "Landmark Article". Only several ones
like this are published every year. One of the major reasons it is so
huge as that it is published in JAMA which is the largest and one of
the most respected medical journals in the entire world.

I did find it most curious that the best wire service in the world,
Reuter's, did not pick up this article. I have no idea why they let it
slip by.

I would encourage you to bookmark this article and review it several
times so you can use the statistics to counter the arguments of your
friends and relatives who are so enthralled with the traditional
medical paradigm. These statistics prove very clearly that the system
is just not working. It is broken and is in desperate need of repair.

I was previously fond of saying that drugs are the fourth leading
cause of death in this country. However, this article makes it quite
clear that the more powerful number is that doctors are the third
leading cause of death in this country killing nearly a quarter
million people a year. The only more common causes are cancer and
heart disease.

This statistic is likely to be seriously underestimated as much of the
coding only describes the cause of organ failure and does not address
iatrogenic causes at all.

Japan seems to have benefited from recognizing that technology is
wonderful, but just because you diagnose something with it, one should
not be committed to undergoing treatment in the traditional paradigm.
Their health statistics reflect this aspect of their philosophy as
much of their treatment is not treatment at all, but loving care
rendered in the home.

Care, not treatment, is the answer. Drugs, surgery and hospitals are
rarely the answer to chronic health problems. Facilitating the God-
given healing capacity that all of us have is the key. Improving the
diet, exercise, and lifestyle are basic.

Effective interventions for the underlying emotional and spiritual
wounding behind most chronic illness are also important clues to
maximizing health and reducing disease.

Related Articles:

Medical Mistakes Kill 100,000 per year

US Health Care System Most Expensive in the World

Drug Induced Disorders

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Author/Article Information

Author Affiliation: Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns
Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md.
Corresponding Author and Reprints: Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH,
Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of
Hygiene and Public Health, 624 N Broadway, Room 452, Baltimore, MD
21205-1996 (e-mail: bstarfie@jhsph.edu).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. How good is the quality of health
care in the United States?
Milbank Q. 1998;76:517-563.

2. Kohn L, ed, Corrigan J, ed, Donaldson M, ed. To Err Is Human:
Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press; 1999.

3. Starfield B. Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and
Technology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.

4. World Health Report 2000. Accessed June 28, 2000.

5. Kunst A. Cross-national Comparisons of Socioeconomic Differences in
Mortality. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus University; 1997.

6. Law M, Wald N. Why heart disease mortality is low in France: the
time lag explanation. BMJ. 1999;313:1471-1480.

7. Starfield B. Evaluating the State Children's Health Insurance
Program: critical considerations.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:569-585.

8. Leape L.Unecessarsary surgery. Annu Rev Public Health.
1992;13:363-383.

9. Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. Increase in US medication-
error deaths between 1983 and 1993. Lancet. 1998;351:643-644.

10. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. Incidence of adverse drug
reactions in hospitalized patients. JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205.

11. Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. Epidemiology and
medical error. BMJ. 2000;320:774-777.

12. Wilkinson R. Unhealthy Societies: The Afflictions of Inequality.
London, England: Routledge; 1996.

13. Evans R, Roos N. What is right about the Canadian health system?
Milbank Q. 1999;77:393-399.

14. Guyer B, Hoyert D, Martin J, Ventura S, MacDorman M, Strobino D.
Annual summary of vital statistics1998. Pediatrics.
1999;104:1229-1246.

15. Harrold LR, Field TS, Gurwitz JH. Knowledge, patterns of care, and
outcomes of care for generalists and specialists. J Gen Intern Med.
1999;14:499-511.

16. Donahoe MT. Comparing generalist and specialty care:
discrepancies, deficiencies, and excesses. Arch Intern Med.
1998;158:1596-1607.

17. Anderson G, Poullier J-P. Health Spending, Access, and Outcomes:
Trends in Industrialized Countries. New York, NY: The Commonwealth
Fund; 1999.

18. Mold J, Stein H. The cascade effect in the clinical care of
patients. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:512-514.

19. Shi L, Starfield B. Income inequality, primary care, and health
indicators. J Fam Pract.1999;48:275-284.

www.mercola.com