So you are saying that they cherrypicked some obscure illnesses to make Europe look good? They used data for:

- infant mortality

- maternal mortality

- colon and breast cancer survival

- heart attack mortality

- childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia (most common childhood cancer)

Those are one of the most common health issues.

Also, here is another recent paper showing how it’s better (health care wise) to be average in EU than wealthy in US: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa2408259

No, I didn't make the argument they were obscure, in fact they all are from a set of common illnesses that....also contains thousands of illnesses. Again, this is the kind of stuff you see with "activist research". Why would they only do 6 instead of hundreds or thousands? I'm sure you see my point.

There are also other oddities like using median county wealth rather than household wealth. In many wealthy counties there are still poor areas, I know more than a few. In fact if you look at the appendix, most of the households in the study are, well, average or poor. They also don't include absolute numbers or definitions for the illnesses.

All in all, it's a bad study, and clearly made to color in an agenda.

The second study looks more grounded, thanks.