And this, naturally, is because we don’t have socialized medicine according to The Guardian:

For decades, the United States has been slipping in international rankings of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition and lifestyles.

Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.

“Something’s wrong here when one of the richest countries in the world, the one that spends the most on health care, is not able to keep up with other countries,’’ said Dr. Christopher Murray, head of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

A baby born in the United States in 2004 will live an average of 77.9 years. That life expectancy ranks 42nd, down from 11th two decades earlier, according to international numbers provided by the Census Bureau and domestic numbers from the National Center for Health Statistics.

There’s a lot of things wrong with this analysis.  First, as Radley Balko points out:

...the article itself notes, the U.S. has set life expectancy records in each of the last five years. And though the article quotes public health officials saying we need to do more to fight cancer and heart disease, deaths from both of those ailments have been in dramatic decline for 15 years. Whatever our ranking in comparison to other countries, the picture here is far from bleak. Deaths from cancer have actually declined overall the last two years, despite increases in population. In fact, overall deaths decreased in 2006, and by the largest margin in sixty years.

Second, one thing that drags down our nation’s overall life expectancy is infant mortality.  In the US, we count all infants deaths as lost lives as long as they show some sign of life after leaving the womb.  Not all countries do this:

The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don’t reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates.

Clearly, a lot of infant deaths are going to drag down overall life expectancy.  It wouldn’t be unreasonable to suggest that these infant deaths could account for the difference between America’s average life expectancy and the life expectancy of the world leader Andorra, which has a number just six years higher than ours.

Third, if socialized or nationalized medicine (whatever you want to call it) is so great, why does America routinely beat the rest of the world in terms of survival rates for serious illnesses?  Again, as Radley Balko points out:

...in the U.S. the mortality rate for prostate cancer is less than 20 percent. In Canada it’s 25 percent. In the UK, it’s more than 50 percent. Breast cancer? A 20 percent mortality rate in the U.S., 33 percent in France in Germany, and nearly half in the U.K.

Finally, if America is lagging behind the rest of the world in life expectancy even after the infant death statistical anomaly is accounted for...so what?  More than likely that lag is being caused by the unhealthy lifestyles we choose to lead.  And is not the choice to eat fast food and sit on the couch all day part of our individual freedoms?  It’s not a great choice by any means, but freedom means being able to make the bad choices along with the good ones.