That overlooks the 27 million uninsured Americans. Uninsured cancer patients are more likely to be diagnosed at a late stage, less likely to receive treatment, and have substantially higher mortality than insured patients.[1] They also have worse survival, even after accounting for cancer stage.[2] So excellent U.S. outcomes among those who access care don't rule out preventable deaths caused by barriers to accessing it.

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25092774/ [2] https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21732

This is a cherry picked statistic. We still have lower life expectancy, high infant mortality rates, and one of the highest rate of preventable and treatable deaths among developed countries

I think the parent comment was a reference to the famous “Economists must learn to subtract” commercial that AdBusters ran.

Some good news is that ISH diagnostics manufacturing can go through 510(k) instead of PMA on Sep 16 onward, which should make those diagnostics 10x cheaper and twice as fast to get through.

>The US has top-tier cancer survival-after-diagnosis outcomes.

"Airplanes that get shot in the wing always survive" logic. People _do not get diagnosed and die_ because the US healthcare system is inaccessible to close to 50% of your population. A diagnosis easily reaches a few hundred dollars for the best cases (and several thousand if you need multiple tests/blood tests/operations like colonoscopies). And when you do get diagnosed, then you've just entered a world of having to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars.

>we get those numbers in part by diagnosing earlier and that our outcomes are broadly similar

lmao no you simply don't diagnose people and they just "die of natural conditions" early because they couldn't afford the treatment even if they were diagnosed.