
Avoidable Deaths Decrease In High-Income Nations And Increase In U.S.
Avoidable deaths are decreasing in high-income nations while they're increasing in the United States. It's a worrisome trend, which is partly responsible for the growing gap in life expectancy between the U.S. and its peers.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. life expectancy took a bigger hit than its peers, as the graph below shows. The figure also depicts how U.S. life expectancy was stagnant between approximately 2010 and 2020, unlike other wealthy, industrialized nations. And prior to 2012, beginning around 1985, the upward slope in life expectancy growth was flatter in the U.S.
There are many factors that have contributed to this trend, one of which is greater numbers of avoidable deaths in the U.S. compared to its peers. Avoidable mortality refers to deaths that ought not to occur in the presence of timely and effective healthcare, including prevention.
Clinicians often examine causes of death to determine whether they could have been avoided by some kind of public health measure. Avoidable deaths in most high-income countries around the world are going down. But in the U.S., avoidable deaths have been on the rise for more than a decade, according to a new study by researchers at the Brown University School of Public Health and Harvard University. They analyzed mortality trends across all 50 U.S. states as well as 40 comparably wealthy nations. The researchers compared mortality data and found that between 2009 to 2021, avoidable mortality in the U.S. worsened, while it improved elsewhere, with the exception of the 2020-2021 time period during COVID-19.
Lead study author Irene Papanicolas, a professor of health services, policy and practice at Brown University's School of Public Health, told Medical Express that the findings published last month in JAMA Internal Medicine suggest unresolved issues in the American healthcare system, in which gaps in public policy may be contributing to worsening health outcomes.
Take, for instance, rising road traffic fatalities since the early 2010s in the U.S. (while these have been diminishing elsewhere), continued very high levels of gun deaths and illicit drug overdoses, higher rates of suicide as well as maternal and infant mortality and illnesses preventable by early detection and treatment, such as cervical cancer and ischemic heart disease.
The researchers found that deaths from a variety of different causes are rising in every U.S. state, with considerable variation across states. The cited study found that between 2009 and 2021 avoidable deaths in the U.S. increased from around 20 to 44 per 100,000.
On the other hand, in most high-income countries around the world, these kinds of avoidable deaths have been decreasing during the same time frame. Other countries saw about 14 fewer avoidable deaths per 100,000. In European Union countries, the reduction was even greater, with an average of almost 24 fewer deaths per 100,000.
Clearly, it's not simply a matter of number of dollars spent on healthcare, given that the U.S. spends more per capita on healthcare than every other high-income country. Perhaps where or how that money is spent that is the key issue.
And as Papanicolas said, referring to policy debates that have occurred across multiple presidential administrations, 'there's been a lot of discussion about preventable deaths in the U.S. such as drug-related deaths or suicides, which do account for a big proportion of this trend. However, we found that deaths from nearly all major categories are increasing."
Under the new Trump administration, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has promoted the idea of making Americans healthy again, advocating for things like eating healthier and limiting exposure to potentially harmful food additives. However, his MAHA vision doesn't address gun violence, motor vehicle safety, maternal and infant mortality, mental health, certain harm reduction factors related to illegal drug consumption and a host of other items contributing to avoidable deaths. And HHS budget cuts may worsen the situation going forward. A conspicuous example of this is a proposed plan by the department to eliminate a relatively small, but effective $56 million annual grant program that distributes the opioid overdose antidote naloxone to first responders across the country.
And what could further exacerbate the problem is the fact that the Trump administration doesn't appear to be focused on measuring certain avoidable deaths. As an illustration, the Department of HHS laid off the entire 17-person team in charge of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. And the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have gotten rid of divisions that oversee databases on things like accidental deaths and injuries, including fatal shootings, poisonings and motor vehicle crashes. Moreover, there is now considerably less federal funding for tracking HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, all of which are preventable. What's not measured can't be properly addressed with tangible policies.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
35 minutes ago
- USA Today
RFK Jr. fires entire CDC vaccine advisory panel
RFK Jr. fires entire CDC vaccine advisory panel Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ousted all 17 members of a panel that advises the CDC on the safety, efficacy and clinical needs of vaccines Show Caption Hide Caption RFK Jr. says COVID-19 vaccine no longer recommended for some The COVID-19 vaccine is no longer recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has fired all 17 members of a committee that advises the federal government on vaccine safety and will replace them with new members, the Department of Health and Human Services announced on June 9. At issue is the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, which makes recommendations on the safety, efficacy, and clinical need of vaccines to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It comprises medical and public health experts who develop recommendations on the use of vaccines in the civilian population of the United States. 'Today we are prioritizing the restoration of public trust above any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda,' said Kennedy Jr., who has a history of controversial views on vaccines. 'The public must know that unbiased science—evaluated through a transparent process and insulated from conflicts of interest—guides the recommendations of our health agencies.' Kennedy Jr.'s decision marks a reversal from what a key Republican senator said the Trump Cabinet member had promised during his confirmation hearings earlier this year. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, the chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, said Kennedy had promised to maintain the committee's current composition. "If confirmed, he will maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices without changes," Cassidy said. The Biden administration appointed all 17 sitting committee members, with 13 of them taking their seats in 2024. According to Trump's HHS, those appointments would have prevented the current administration from choosing a majority of the committee until 2028. 'A clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science,' said Kennedy, adding that the new members "will prioritize public health and evidence-based medicine". and "no longer function as a rubber stamp for industry profit-taking agendas."


Axios
43 minutes ago
- Axios
RFK Jr. removes all 17 members of vaccine committee for CDC
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy on Monday removed all 17 members of the expert panel that makes vaccine policy recommendations to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, saying they'd be replaced with "new members currently under consideration." Why it matters: HHS portrayed the unprecedented move as "restoring public trust" in vaccines, but it's expected to introduce anti-vaccine ideology to the influential panel. The big picture: The Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices is comprised of appointees including vaccine and infectious disease experts from academic medical centers and other public health professionals. They evaluate vaccine data at public meetings and were due to meet later this month to discuss COVID-19 vaccines, among other topics. Kennedy during his confirmation process had promised senators he would keep the panel, without committing to maintaining its current makeup. Thirteen of panelists were appointed by the Biden administration in 2024 with terms that end in 2028. "A clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science," Kennedy said in a statement. "ACIP new members will prioritize public health and evidence-based medicine. The committee will no longer function as a rubber stamp for industry profit-taking agendas. The other side:"CDC just lost all credibility in this space," one of the current ACIP members, who requested anonymity in order to comment, told Axios.

an hour ago
NIH scientists sign open letter criticizing Trump administration's grant cancellations, firings
More than 300 scientists from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) signed an open letter on Monday morning to director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, criticizing the Trump administration over recent moves. The letter, including 92 signed names and 250 anonymous but verified signatories, shares concerns that research is being politicized, global collaboration is being interrupted and that budget and staff cuts have hindered the ability of NIH to do important research. "[W]e dissent to Administration policies that undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe," the letter reads. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political momentum over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources." Some of the NIH scientists who signed the letter, speaking in their personal capacity and not on behalf of the agency, told ABC News they and their colleagues have tried to raise concerns internally -- and repeatedly -- but to no avail. They said there is now an urgency to speak up, especially as Bhattacharya is set to testify on Tuesday at a hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee on the proposed NIH budget for the upcoming fiscal year. "There is a lot of risk to speaking up, and I am very scared still, even after it's already done, even after it's already said," Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and one of the lead organizers of the letter, told ABC News. "I think a lot of people are focused on the risk of speaking up, but we also need to think about the risk of not speaking up." The letter, called the Bethesda Declaration -- NIH is headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland -- is modeled after the Great Barrington Declaration, of which Bhattacharya was a co-author. Published in October 2020 and named after the Massachusetts town in which it was drafted, the Great Barrington Declaration called for COVID-19 lockdowns to be avoided and a new plan for handling the pandemic by protecting the most vulnerable individuals but allowing most to resume normal activities, achieving herd immunity naturally. At the time, it was widely criticized by public health professionals, including Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, who said allowing a virus "we don't fully understand to run free is simply unethical." During testimony before Congress in March 2023, Bhattacharya said the declaration was targeted for "suppression" by federal health officials. "We modeled the Bethesda Declaration after the Great Barrington Declaration … because we wanted him to see himself in our action," Norton said. "He's spoken a lot about his commitment to academic freedom and to dissent. If Jay Bhattacharya is the person he very publicly claims to be, and if he is actually in charge at NIH, our hope is that this will move him to action. And if he's not the person he says to be or he's not in charge at NIH, I think the public and Congress should be aware of that." The letter called on Bhattacharya to reverse grants that have been delayed or terminated for "political reasons" and to allow work with foreign collaborators. The signatories also asked Bhattacharya to reverse a policy capping indirect costs for research at 15% and to reinstate essential staff who were fired at NIH. "The Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions the NIH has taken in recent months, including the continuing support of the NIH for international collaboration," Bhattacharya said in a statement to ABC News. "Nevertheless, respectful dissent in science is productive. We all want the NIH to succeed." A spokesperson for the Department of Health & Human Services told ABC News that the agency has not halted "legitimate" collaborations with international partners. Additionally, the spokesperson said other funders, like the Gates Foundation, cap indirect costs at 15% and that each case of termination is being reviewed. Ian Morgan, a postdoctoral researcher at the NIH's National Institute of General Medical Sciences whose work focused on antimicrobial resistance, told ABC News seeing the changes at the agency has been a "traumatic experience." He said when the Trump administration came into office, he was prevented from doing research in his lab because he couldn't purchase essential items and he was not allowed to attend a conference in February to speak with potential collaborators. He also saw many of his coworkers get accidentally terminated and then reinstated. "It's just really traumatic and really disruptive for researchers at the NIH," Morgan, who signed the letter, said. "We get into this not because we're trying to make money, not because of our own benefit. We're getting into this because we want to serve the public. We want to do life-saving research." Sarah Kobrin, a branch chief at the NIH's National Cancer Institute (NCI) who also signed the letter, said prior to the new administration, she worked with researchers interested either in receiving funds from NCI or who had funds already and were requesting assistance from NCI. However, with more than 2,100 research grants totaling around $9.5 billion terminated at NIH -- according to the letter -- she said some of her daily tasks have changed. "I spend my time on the phone now talking with people who've just learned that their projects have been cut and have been given false, pseudo-scientific reasons to say their work is not valuable, not important for public health for America, and it's just not true," Kobrin told ABC News. The NIH researchers told ABC News there is a public letter that people can sign to express their support or they can contact their congressional representatives to express their concerns. Morgan, the antimicrobial researcher, said he doesn't want the letter to just be about detailing all the changes that occurred at NIH since Trump took office. "It is us standing up and showing that that not everything is lost, and certainly there's been irreparable damage, but we still have time to right the ship and take it in the right direction," he said. "I need to leave people with that message of hope because, otherwise, they can feel there's nothing that they can do, and that we're powerless, but we are all powerful."