Sen. Tom Harkin Visits Cuba, Is Pretty Impressed With Its Public Health System

their rate of survivability of numerous inborn defects is also differnt.

explanation - they die. they do not survive and they die before 30 days so to be called "stillborn" and therefore those children do not impact the "children mortality rate" in the future.
Because all the "defective" children are already dead and considered "stillbirth".
 
How do you know their health system is "so effective?" Cause of what Michael Moore and what a democratic senator says?

No wonder so many Americans are trying to float over there on leaky boats, as opposed to them trying to get to America on leaky boats.


:dunno:

So your contention is that all of the studies are based off of bad data? Do you have any evidence of that?

I already posted some that you will ignore because you already have all the answers you need.

There is something ironic about someone claiming the situation is not as good as it can be because people have turned to making a profit and a market approach to healthcare as opposed to just giving it away.

It makes sense though. In order for them to be getting the results they are they would have to invest into healthcare technology. They could never afford that investment unless they were able to make some money off of that investment. Something they couldn't do selling to only their poor people.
 
Last edited:
I think my question is right in line with the subject. Now, back to my question. Why do liberals deny they are communists?

So visiting a communist country makes someone communist?

No, but spouting the Communist Party line tends to add evidence to support the charge. Did you even consider the possibility that Cuba was lying about how great their system is after decades of an embargo that everyone with an IQ above 0 degrees Kelvin knows ends up hurting poor people a lot more than it does those in power?

To call someone a communist for not absolutely shitting on everything they see in a communist country is stupid, By your standard Nixon was a communist after he came back from China.
 
However, the method of calculating IMR often varies widely between countries, and is based on how they define a live birth and how many premature infants are born in the country. Infant mortality rates can be flawed depending on a nations’ live birth criterion, vital registration system, and reporting practices.[22] Certain practices of measurements have the potential to be underestimated. Measurements provide a statistical way of measuring the standard of living of residents living in each nation. Increases and decreases of the infant mortality rate reflect social and technical capacities of a nations’ population.[5] The World Health Organization (WHO) defines a live birth as any born human being who demonstrates independent signs of life, including breathing, heartbeat, umbilical cord pulsation or definite movement of voluntary muscles.[23] This definition is practised in Austria, for example.[24] In Germany the WHO definition is practised as well but with one little adjustment: the muscle movement is not considered as a sign of life.[25] Many countries, however, including certain European states (e.g. France) and Japan, only count as live births cases where an infant breathes at birth, which makes their reported IMR numbers somewhat lower and raises their rates of perinatal mortality.[26] In the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, for instance, requirements for live birth are even higher.[27]

Although many countries have vital registration systems and certain reporting practices, there are a great number of inaccuracies, particularly in undeveloped nations, in the statistics of the amount of infants dying. Studies have shown in comparing three information sources: official registries, household surveys, and popular reporters, the “popular death reporters” show the greatest amount of accuracy. Popular death reporters include indigenous midwives, gravediggers, coffin builders, priests, and more—essentially people who knew the most about the child’s death. In developing nations, access to vital registries, and other government run systems pose difficulties for poor families to record births and deaths due to a variety of reasons. These struggles force stress on families, and make them take drastic measures in unofficial death ceremonies for their deceased infants, as well as inaccurately reflect a nations infant mortality rate. Popular death reporters provide information first hand from inside sources gaining reliable facts that: provide a nation with accurate death counts, meaningful causes of deaths that can be measured/studied, and allow a sense of relief and meaning to a child’s death which may give families less pain/grievance.[28]

UNICEF uses a statistical methodology to account for reporting differences among countries:
“ UNICEF compiles infant mortality country estimates derived from all sources and methods of estimation obtained either from standard reports, direct estimation from micro data sets, or from UNICEF’s yearly exercise. In order to sort out differences between estimates produced from different sources, with different methods, UNICEF developed, in coordination with WHO, the WB and UNSD, an estimation methodology that minimizes the errors embodied in each estimate and harmonize trends along time. Since the estimates are not necessarily the exact values used as input for the model, they are often not recognized as the official IMR estimates used at the country level. However, as mentioned before, these estimates minimize errors and maximize the consistency of trends along time.[29] ”

Another challenge to comparability is the practice of counting frail or premature infants who die before the normal due date as miscarriages (spontaneous abortions) or those who die during or immediately after childbirth as stillborn. Therefore, the quality of a country's documentation of perinatal mortality can matter greatly to the accuracy of its infant mortality statistics. This point is reinforced by the demographer Ansley Coale, who finds dubiously high ratios of reported stillbirths to infant deaths in Hong Kong and Japan in the first 24 hours after birth, a pattern that is consistent with the high recorded sex ratios at birth in those countries. It suggests not only that many female infants who die in the first 24 hours are misreported as stillbirths rather than infant deaths, but also that those countries do not follow WHO recommendations for the reporting of live births and infant deaths.[30]

The exclusion of any high-risk infants from the denominator or numerator in reported IMRs can be problematic for comparisons. Many countries, including the United States, Sweden and Germany, count an infant exhibiting any sign of life as alive, no matter the month of gestation or the size, but according to United States some other countries differ in these practices. All of the countries named adopted the WHO definitions in the late 1980s or early 1990s,[32] which are used throughout the European Union.[33] However, in 2009, the US CDC issued a report that stated that the American rates of infant mortality were affected by the United States' high rates of premature babies compared to European countries. It also outlined the differences in reporting requirements between the United States and Europe, noting that France, the Czech Republic, Ireland, the Netherlands, and Poland do not report all live births of babies under 500 g and/or 22 weeks of gestation.[34][35][36]
 
Why do liberals deny they are communists?

(rhetorical at this point)
 
So visiting a communist country makes someone communist?

No, but spouting the Communist Party line tends to add evidence to support the charge. Did you even consider the possibility that Cuba was lying about how great their system is after decades of an embargo that everyone with an IQ above 0 degrees Kelvin knows ends up hurting poor people a lot more than it does those in power?

To call someone a communist for not absolutely shitting on everything they see in a communist country is stupid, By your standard Nixon was a communist after he came back from China.

no, he is simply an idiot. and a lying one, becasue all the statistics are easily manipulated and that can be changed just by changing of the definition.

the premature babies less than 1000 grams birth weigh ( which is more than 2 lbs) are not even considered in the statistics either in Cuba or in any socialist country.
American statistics include even babies born with less than 500 grams birth weigh.


learn what you are talking about first, so you do not look like an idiot brainwashed parrot mouthpiece - like this dimocrap from Iowa.
 
Why do conservatives deny that they are Nazis? They like ice cream just like the Nazis did.
 
Why do liberals deny they are communists?

(rhetorical at this point)

because LIBERALS are not communists. the ones here are leftards, not liberals. leftards are communists, although they do not know it because of their ignorance.
 
And the Cuban government would NEVER misrepresent their statistics right??
No history of EVER doing that right??
Yeah...I believe every word they say.
fashoo%204x5%20web.gif
 
So a Senator visits a communist country, sees only what they let him see, speaks to those he is allowed to speak to. So what do you think he is going to see and hear?

And the liberals buy it, hook, line and sinker.
 
Timothy McVeigh bombed a federal building killing Americans. That must mean all conservatives want to bomb federal buildings and kill Americans. Right?
 
So a Senator visits a communist country, sees only what they let him see, speaks to those he is allowed to speak to. So what do you think he is going to see and hear?

And the liberals buy it, hook, line and sinker.

It is funny because there was a similar dog and pony show where Republican Congressmen visited a factory to check up on working conditions and gave it their stamp of approval only to later find out that they were in violation of all sorts of American laws.
 
So a Senator visits a communist country, sees only what they let him see, speaks to those he is allowed to speak to. So what do you think he is going to see and hear?

And the liberals buy it, hook, line and sinker.

It is funny because there was a similar dog and pony show where Republican Congressmen visited a factory to check up on working conditions and gave it their stamp of approval only to later find out that they were in violation of all sorts of American laws.

And yet you still buy Harkin's BS! Go figure.
 
Timothy McVeigh bombed a federal building killing Americans. That must mean all conservatives want to bomb federal buildings and kill Americans. Right?

Slick Willy and Janet Reno firebombed the Davidians compound in Waco, TX. That must mean all "liberals" want to incinerate alive religious compounds and kill Americans. Right?

.
 
So your contention is that all of the studies are based off of bad data? Do you have any evidence of that?

I already posted some that you will ignore because you already have all the answers you need.

There is something ironic about someone claiming the situation is not as good as it can be because people have turned to making a profit and a market approach to healthcare as opposed to just giving it away.

It makes sense though. In order for them to be getting the results they are they would have to invest into healthcare technology. They could never afford that investment unless they were able to make some money off of that investment. Something they couldn't do selling to only their poor people.

There is something pathetic about you.

I see it now, it is actually your brain. You don't use it, so it smells like shit.
 

Forum List

Back
Top